Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

From Fundamentalist Baptist to Catholic – Steve Wilson’s Story
http://www.catholic-convert.com/ ^ | February 26, 2015 | Steve Wilson

Posted on 03/01/2015 4:54:44 PM PST by NKP_Vet

Archbishop Fulton Sheen once wrote: “There are not over a hundred people in the United State who hate the Roman Catholic Church; there are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church.”

I was one of those who hated because of what I wrongly believed about the Catholic Church. The reason I had these beliefs was due to being told what to believe about the Catholic Church from those who were told what to believe about the Catholic Church. No one was willing to find out what the bottom line was concerning the Catholic Church. Everything said about the Church was taken as truth while it seemed no one was delving into what the truth really was.

What about these Catholics? They worshipped Mary. They had a religion but not a relationship with Jesus Christ. They said they believed in God but really their belief couldn’t be the same, could it? The Bible says in James 2:19 KJV “Thou believest that there is one God; Thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble”.

So do Catholics have a belief such as the devils? When most Catholics are asked if they have been “born again” or “have accepted Christ as their Savior”, their main response is “I believe in God” or “I am a good person”, or “I’m Catholic”. Also, they have all these rituals, Saints, Statues and what about the Pope is he really standing in for God? Another big item, are they cannibals when they eat the bread and drink the wine during communion? Why do they leave Jesus on the cross, don’t they realize Jesus has risen from the dead?

For the rest of Steve’s story, click at link.

(Excerpt) Read more at catholic-convert.com ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; Ecumenism; Ministry/Outreach; Theology
KEYWORDS: pimpmyblog
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 601-620621-640641-660 ... 1,261-1,263 next last
To: terycarl; IWONDR; teppe; Normandy
With a resume' like this, you're due to advance in the Organization quite rapidly!

It sure worked for Hinckley!!


 
"I Don't Know..."
 
 
 
 
 In case you don't recognize the title of this post, it is part of President Hinckley's answer to a reporter's question that appeared in the August 4 1997 issue of Time magazine. The reporter referenced the King Follett discourse. The answer supplied and the manner in which it was delivered caused the reporter to draw some false conclusions about a very important doctrine.

In that discourse, the prophet Joseph Smith said, "If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by His power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man." (See also D&C 130:22)

The article referred to Lorenzo Snow's couplet, "As man is now, God once was; as God now is, man may become." The reporter said, "God the Father was once a man as we are. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing." President Hinckley was then asked, "Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?"

The bothersome reply

"I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it."

The reporter wrote, "On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man, he sounded uncertain." That's an unfortunate conclusion. Of course I wasn't at the interview and neither were you but I'll bet the reporter mistook careful thoughtfulness for uncertainty. This doctrine is indeed deep territory and not something that is taught outside the LDS Church.



An earlier and similar interview

The San Francisco Chronicle, published an interview with President Hinckley in April of 1997. The reporter asked, "There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormon's believe that God was once a man?" President Hinckley responded, "I wouldn't say that. There is a little couplet coined, 'As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.'"

He then said, "Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about." The reporter pounced on this. "So you're saying that the church is still struggling to understand this? " President Hinckley responded, "Well, as God is, man may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly."

President Hinckley's response

President Hinckley said in October 1997 General Conference: "I personally have been much quoted, and in a few instances misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine.

"I think I understand them thoroughly, and it is unfortunate that the reporting may not make this clear. I hope you will never look to the public press as the authority on the doctrines of the Church." And there lies the whole point of my post today. Some members did indeed become a little concerned by the exchanges they read in the press reports of those interviews.

Does the Church still teach this?

I know this is old news but it still bothers some people when they discover the anti-Mormon attacks floating around on the Internet. President Hinckley was right. We really don't know much about how our Heavenly Father became a God. The idea that he passed through a mortal probationary state like you and me is certainly not documented in any scripture of which I know.

However, it is still taught. In the Gospel Principles manual in the chapter on exaltation we read, "Joseph Smith taught: "It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us; . . . God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-46)."

Summary and conclusion

I don't know why this should bother anyone. The doctrine is true. Joseph Smith knew a whole lot more about this than I do. President Hinckley also knew a whole lot more about this doctrine than he was willing to share with reporters who did not have the background to understand it. It must have been difficult for President Hinckley to hold back and not teach it in those interviews.

It didn't bother me when I read the interviews back in 1997 and it doesn't bother me today. However, I know it does bother some people. We each have trials of our faith. I have never depended on an intellectual understanding of the gospel in order to accept it and live it. There are some things that just can't be fully comprehended without the temple, prayer and faith.



There are some things that just can't be fully comprehended without the temple, prayer and faith.

621 posted on 03/03/2015 3:21:10 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: Crim
Muslims worship a rock...

Unlearned Catholics say that PETER was the Rock...

622 posted on 03/03/2015 3:22:07 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Syncro
But maybe he just plays a "priest" on the internet.

If he just PLAYS one; then he is a liar.


I am a Catholic priest.

I am much nicer than, but not so smart as, Arthur McGowan. I welcome communication from FReepers, especially those with sincere religious, moral, or philosophical concerns.

623 posted on 03/03/2015 3:26:38 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Syncro
But maybe he just plays a "priest" on the internet.

But; with SO many from which to choose; just WHO is speaking from beyond the grave??


https://www.google.com/search?q=arthur+mcgowan+obituary&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADRA_enUS475&gws_rd=ssl

624 posted on 03/03/2015 3:27:37 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
There is only one reason that anyone would PRETEND, as you do, not to recognize that those statements were ironic: fully deliberate malice.

There is only one reason that Steve Wilson would PRETEND to believe the Catholic Church: to enter the body; much like a Guinea worm; to suck the juices and spread his spawn.

625 posted on 03/03/2015 3:31:53 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 454 | View Replies]

To: Crim

Sorry I left the Catholic church in 1989.

I was not around in the 1500s.


626 posted on 03/03/2015 3:32:21 AM PST by redleghunter (He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself. Lk24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 597 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

It took years but the Catholics here FINALLY fessed up praying TO Mary. Waiting for the day they admit to worshipping her as well.


627 posted on 03/03/2015 3:34:06 AM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
I submit entirely to the judgment of all non-malicious FReepers.

Like Mary said YES!!! to the angel; when TOLD what her future was going to be; I 'submit' to the judgement of GOD.


Matthew 12:36
And I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak.

628 posted on 03/03/2015 3:37:08 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

Comment #629 Removed by Moderator

To: verga; metmom

Is your name written there?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex1PXk3cj0U


630 posted on 03/03/2015 3:54:50 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 465 | View Replies]

To: Crim

Catholics simply cannot wrap their minds around not following man.

That is proved true time and again on these threads.


631 posted on 03/03/2015 3:55:09 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

Wrong because without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins.

Water can’t do it because it’s the wrong thing for doing it.


632 posted on 03/03/2015 3:56:19 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
Oh good grief...I'm not even going to comment on that bit of biblical wisdom.....sheesh

Maybe you will after you read #317.



633 posted on 03/03/2015 3:56:47 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

The Holy Spirit leads men to Christ.

That’s HIS job.


634 posted on 03/03/2015 3:57:13 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
Martin Luther was an ordained clergyman in the Catholic church. He was a Catholic.

'Poorly catechized' covers a multitude of sin.

635 posted on 03/03/2015 3:57:56 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 481 | View Replies]

To: verga

They disagree with me on what?


636 posted on 03/03/2015 3:58:20 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
it must have taken you years to interview enough Catholics to validate your research.....

This?

Coming from YOU?

637 posted on 03/03/2015 3:58:36 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 482 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
The Catholic church is divided into sects?

How ELSE to explain the EOs?

638 posted on 03/03/2015 3:59:34 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 489 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero; IWONDR; WilliamRobert; teppe; Normandy
The Catholic church is divided into sects?

Mormonism is:


With the Mormons (to be precise, the members of The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - based in Salt Lake City) intent on being called “Christians” after so many years of eschewing that word, and despite the fact that there are so many fundamental theological differences between Christianity and Mormonism, I often wonder: 

How do members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints feel about calling the members of its various spin-off sects Latter-Day Saints, Christians, or Mormons? Or about those sects calling themselves Mormons or Latter-Day Saints? (There was an earlier campaign by LDS to have journalism style books use the word “Mormon” to refer only to LDS, and not RLDS, FLDS, or other LDS sects).

For a man who bragged about holding things together, Joseph Smith, Jr. doesn’t appear go have done a good job of it during his lifetime. Wycam Clark’s “Pure Church of Christ” spun off in 1831. This trend continued. There were six LDS sects spawned in the 1830s, eight in the 1840s, two in the 1850s, and seven in the 1860s.

Do those responsible for the “Mormons are Christians” campaign consider these denominations to be Mormons or Latter-Day Saints? Surely many of these denominations are much closer to mainstream LDS than LDS is to Christianity. Many stick to Smith’s teachings and old temple endowment ceremonies.

Short Creek Community
Latter Day Church of Christ
Apostolic United Brethren
Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Church of the Firstborn of the Fulness [sic] of Times
Church of the Lamb of God
Church of the New Covenant in Christ
Confederate Nations of Israel
Righteous Branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
School of the Prophets
Centennial Park
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God
True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days
The Church of the Firstborn and the General Assembly of Heaven

Blackmore/Bountiful Community
Restoration Church of Jesus Christ
Order of Enoch
Aaronic Order
Zion’s Order, Inc.
Perfected Church of Jesus Christ of Immaculate Latter-day Saints
Church of Jesus Christ (Bullaite)
Community of Christ
Church of Jesus Christ (Toneyite)
Independent RLDS / Restoration Branches
Church of Jesus Christ Restored 1830
Church of Christ (Lion of God Ministry/Clarkite)
Church of Jesus Christ (Zion’s Branch)
Restoration Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Church of Christ (Temple Lot) (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ (Fettingite) (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ at Halley’s Bluff (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ (Restored) (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ “With the Elijah Message” (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ (Hancock) (Hedrickite)
Church of Christ (Burtite) (Hendrickite)
Church of Israel (Hendrickite)
Church of Christ with the Elijah Message (The Assured Way of the Lord) (Hendrickite)
The Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite)
Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite)
True Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite)
Restored Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite)
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite)
Holy Church of Jesus Christ (Strangite)
Church of Jesus Christ (Drewite) (Strangite)
True Church of Jesus Christ Restored (Strangite)
Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Whitmerite)

Or these defunct sects:

Pure Church of Christ (Clarkite)
Independent Church (Hotonite)
Church of Christ (Boothite)
Church of Christ (Parrishite)
Alston Church
Church of Christ (Chubbyite)
Church of Jesus Christ, the Bride, the Lamb’s Wife
Church of Christ (Pageite)
True Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (this one was particularly curious - started by William Law, editor of The Nauvoo Expositor, just one of many sects started in opposition to plural marriage)
The Church of Zion (Godbeite)
United Order Family of Christ
Church of the Potter Christ
Church of the Firstborn (Morrisite)
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Gibsonite)
Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Most High
Church of the Christian Brotherhood
Church of Jesus Christ of the Children of Zion (Rigdonite) Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite)
Primative Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite)
Church of Christ (Aaron Smith)
Church of the Messiah (Adamsite)
Church of Christ (Wrightite)
Church of Christ (Whitmerite)
Church of Christ (Brewsterite)
The Bride, the Lamb’s Wife
Congregation of Jehovah’s Presbytery of Zion
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Gladdenite)
Independent Latter Day Saints of Nigeria
Independent Latter Day Saints of Ghana
Apostolic Divine Church of Ghana

Are members of those LDS groups “Mormons”? “Latter Day Saints?” “Christians?”

Do the folks in Salt Lake City have a problem with any of those groups, who believe in the restoration of the original church by Joseph Smith, calling themselves Mormons or Saints?

Most of these divisions in the Latter-Day Saint movement occurred over the issue of polygamy or succession of the Prophet. Sects broke off when Joseph Smith was still alive, and when Brigham Young was named prophet, because they didn’t believe in the practice of plural marriage – either publicly, or in some cases when it was practiced in private and denied in public.

Of course, there was the great split between Rocky Mountain Saints and Prairie Saints, when LDS members couldn’t agree on a successor prophet to Smith, Jr., and the church went to Utah, Missouri, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania under Brigham Young, Sidney Rigdon (senior member of the First Presidency), James Strang, Lyman Wight, Alpheus Cutler, William Smith, David Whitmer (a BOM witness), or Joseph Smith III (son of Joseph Smith, Jr.). Almost all of these individuals still has multiple sects in existence that date to an 1844 decision about who should be the next President/Prophet of the church.

The Prairie Saints split into sects over the issue of whether Smith practiced polygamy. Rocky Mountain Saints had many, many spinoff sects after the 1890 Manifesto – groups that still practice plural marriage.

======================================================================================================================================================

Thanks to ScoutMaster for all the hard work here!

639 posted on 03/03/2015 4:01:15 AM PST by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 489 | View Replies]

To: Crim

No it’s not calling the person demonic.

It’s calling the NDE that the person experienced demonic.

HUGE difference.

But I can see that reading comprehension is not a Catholic’s strong suit. Perhaps it’s better after all that they don’t try to interpret Scripture themselves. But then again, someone would need to interpret the interpretation.....


640 posted on 03/03/2015 4:02:07 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 567 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 601-620621-640641-660 ... 1,261-1,263 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson