[Ksnavely]

Just because Catholicism does not adhere to your (obviously protestant) interpretation of the Christian faith, does not mean it is not treated by historians as the Christian Church.

Plus there are millions of Catholics who would disagree with you calling them unchristian, and with good reason.

Jesus said I am the way the truth and the light, no man comes to the father but by me and you are by definition a Christian if you believe in Jesus and believe he is what he says he is. Notice when Jesus said no one comes to the father but by me, he did no tack on a bunch of other requirements such as believing in the absolute authority (and divinely Inspired origin) of a letter written to a slave master by Paul (Philemon anyone?) Could I interpret your attempt to tack on addition requirements to go to heaven as being unchristian just like you do to the Catholics?

[usa1776]

Interesting, I'm am "tacking on" to the Bible?

Your quote Jesus and do not even realize that the Catholic Church has a long history of contradicting the very quote you use.

No man comes to the father but through Jesus. So we agree that salvation through works is a lie and an addition to the Bible. Salvation through works denies the work of Jesus and grace of God.

And we agree praying to Mary is a lie, you only come to the father through Jesus.

Who is adding to the Bible? We are talking about salvation here, its a topic worth getting right.

As to what "historians" or "catholics" think is irrelevant, the Bible is the standard.

What's with the reference to Philemon? As I recall that book involves a runaway slave accepting the word of God and then returning to his Master. Paul offered to pay any debts and accept him as a brother in Christ. I never suggested that anything someone had done would prevent them from being a Christian as much as any Christian. The key is accepting the word of God, not calling yourself a Christian. Big difference.