Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Who are the Catholics: The Orthodox or The Romanists, or both?
Me

Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience

I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?

I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?


TOPICS: Catholic; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: 1holyapostolicchurch; apostates; catholic; catholicbashing; catholicwhiners; devilworshippers; eckleburghers; greeks; heathen; orthodoxyistheone; papistcrybabies; proddiecatholic; robot; romanistispejorative; romanists; romanistwhinefest; romannamecallers; russians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 3,541-3,5603,561-3,5803,581-3,600 ... 12,201-12,204 next last
To: Natural Law; Dr. Eckleburg; All
Do not make this thread "about" individual Freepers. That is also a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

3,561 posted on 01/15/2010 10:05:48 PM PST by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NoGrayZone; MarkBsnr; Quix; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Mr Rogers; RnMomof7; the_conscience; ...
I have stated before, no I am not a Trinitarian. Yes that puts me at odds with most folk here, but I do not care

Yes, a non-Trinitarian is in the list of Protestants too -- just like you have Kabbalist Jews, Unitarians etc. as long as they are against The Church, all is fine.
3,562 posted on 01/15/2010 10:08:17 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3482 | View Replies]

To: Iscool; MarkBsnr; Petronski; Dr. Eckleburg; Mad Dawg; wagglebee; Judith Anne; Quix
Antioch is in Turkey. It was taken by Turkey post WWII -- it is NOT in Syria, though it has a Syriac tradition. Dr. Eek posted an incorrect link from from obscure website that purportedly state that Antioch was in Syria and said, rather strangely "LOL, you win"

Now, that is typical -- posting an incorrect piece from some strange website and stating it as FACT.

Then, when this is pointing out, Iscool, you haven't admitted your error.

But instead have tried to deviate the topic. That is typical of the worst anti-Church posters on this and other threads -- a falsehood from a lying website posted as a fact, then bandied about as a fact. Then, when proven wrong, trying to deviate this and posting another fallacy to argue about
3,563 posted on 01/15/2010 10:11:29 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3494 | View Replies]

To: Iscool; MarkBsnr

The Antioch referred to in The Bible is the one which is currently now in Turkey. That city has been a living one since Greek times and earlier and there is no doubt that this is the Antioch of +Paul


3,564 posted on 01/15/2010 10:12:46 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3499 | View Replies]

To: constitutiongirl; MarkBsnr; Iscool; Dr. Eckleburg; the_conscience; Petronski; wagglebee
I agree -- Mark is to be commended for his patience.

The argument so far, for those who came late :)

Iscool: Antioch is in Syria

Mark: Not really, it's in Turkey

Dr E: Ha HA! {posts some strange details from some strange obscure website (that's like the other anti-Church screed websites, all falsehoods, mostly laughable)
Mark: Antioch is not in Syria. The map you posted does not show the borders. And it does not claim that Antioch is in Syria.
As in your Scriptural proofs, your map does not show what you claim it shows. Any more than your snippets of Scripture taken out of context mean what you say that they mean.

Iscool: Well, since the scripture doesn't cut it, and the historical maps don't cut it, will you show us the relevant section of your catechism that shows us where THAT Antioch is at??? (font color = "blue">(now arguing that the catechism should have a geography lesson)

Mark: The CIA Factbook or any non Calvinist world map does very well. The current spelling is Antakya, in case you have difficulties.

Iscool: ( is this a deviation? ) What was the spelling 2000 years ago when it was written in the scriptures???

Iscool: ( is this deviating again? ) Oh, I get it...You think the only Antioch in existance at the time was in modern day Turkey... Well guess what...I’m about 40 miles from Berlin...But it ain’t in Germany...Imagine that...

Mark: ( Still astonishingly calm ) Ἀντιόχεια ἡ ἐπὶ Δάφνῃ You surely didn't think that it was written in English in your KJV that Jesus and the Apostles taught from, did you?

Mark: How many Antiochs do you think were scattered around the world of the Bible? Antioch, South Africa? Antioch, South Dakota? Antioch, Planet Mars? Antioch, the Andromeda Cluster?

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

Phew!! Talk about running around in circles!! But that's about par for the course for a normal anti-Church screed (post randomness from obscure website and then jump around)
3,565 posted on 01/15/2010 10:25:03 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3524 | View Replies]

To: Iscool; MarkBsnr; constitutiongirl
Paul started in Antioch...If that Antioch was the Antioch in Turkey, Paul would have had to travel across Turkey, back into Syria to he could catch the boat at Seleucia,

you DO realise that Syria and Turkey are neighbors, right? And that Antioch/Antakya is on the border with Syria?
3,566 posted on 01/15/2010 10:27:18 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3528 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne; NoGrayZone
The "communion of saints" occurs whenever God's children meet to worship Him and strengthen each other through the Gospel.

"And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O LORD: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints." -- Psalm 89:5


"Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's" -- 1 Corinthians 1:1-2

As the Westminster Confession of Faith reminds us in Chapter XXVI - Of the Communion of Saints...

I. All saints, that are united to Jesus Christ their Head, by His Spirit, and by faith, have fellowship with Him in His grace, sufferings, death, resurrection, and glory:[1] and, being united to one another in love, they have communion in each other's gifts and graces,[2] and are obliged to the performance of such duties, public and private, as do conduce to their mutual good, both in the inward and outward man.[3]

II. Saints by profession are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and communion in the worship of God, and in performing such other spiritual services as tend to their mutual edification;[4] as also in relieving each other in outward things, according to their several abilities and necessities. Which communion, as God offers opportunity, is to be extended unto all those who, in every place, call upon the name of the Lord Jesus.[5]

III. This communion which the saints have with Christ, does not make them in any wise partakers of the substance of His Godhead; or to be equal with Christ in any respect: either of which to affirm is impious and blasphemous.[6] Nor does their communion one with another, as saints, take away, or infringe the title or propriety which each man has in his goods and possessions.[7]

3,567 posted on 01/15/2010 10:29:23 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3469 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Judith Anne

you need to call that group, the Macheniacs or the Machen-lovers. It seems that various groups in the OPC, BPC, APC, and all the rainbow color of acronyms that Gresham Machen spawned, some consider Machen a saint, some groups a demi-god, some a prophet, some even higher. So, these tiny cults are all Machenists or Macheniacs, followers of Machen not Christ


3,568 posted on 01/15/2010 10:30:28 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3534 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; NoGrayZone

Ah, so Doctor, you do share the believe with NGZ that Jesus was not God? that they are separate?


3,569 posted on 01/15/2010 10:33:05 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3551 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Try not to worry, Mark. Really try.

"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36

3,570 posted on 01/15/2010 10:33:28 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3454 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I know that this is a joke... but have you ever noticed that Catholics always have a St Peter at the gate joke... (my RC family has one every time I see them)

I think this reflects the church (as represented by Peter) as the gate keeper to heaven

The Mormons teach no one gets into the highest heaven until they pass Joseph Smith

But scripture says to be absent from the body is to be present to God.. no St Peter...no joseph Smith just the judgement os a Holy God.

Great observation.

And if a Protestant told one of those jokes he'd be accused of being an "anti-Catholic bigot."

3,571 posted on 01/15/2010 10:55:51 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3405 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Nah, lots of Protestants believe that St. Peter will meet them at the Pearly Gates.

That is, Protestant Christians
3,572 posted on 01/15/2010 10:59:30 PM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3571 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers; Dr. Eckleburg; blue-duncan; HarleyD; wmfights; RnMomof7; Gamecock; Alex Murphy
You bring up a point that first made me draw back fro the PD side...when I realized that folks thought it meant we were saved, and then had faith.

I totally agree with the order of salvation Harley laid out (with scriptures) in his most excellent post. :)

I think we need to be careful when we use the word "saved" because it can have several perfectly correct Biblical uses that don't appear to say the same thing. Sometimes we say "saved" when we mean "by God's promises salvation is certain". God's promises are so airtight that "will be saved" can functionally equal "saved now". If someone said "the elect were saved from the foundations" I would know exactly what the speaker meant and agree with the sentiment, even though the elements of salvation had not yet taken place within time. All of this is to say that perhaps your concern above might be alleviated when considered in this context.

FK: “If we are born able to say “yes” then perhaps God’s grace would not be indispensable.”

But if no man seeks God, and God seeks us instead, we are already totally dependent on God’s grace.

Yes, that is absolutely correct. For salvation we are totally dependent on God's grace. For food, shelter, and clothing we are totally dependent on God's creation around us. Indeed for every good thing I can't think of anything on which we are not totally dependent on God.

Col. 1:15-17 : 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

And given that God is a loving God, for what good things would you NOT want to be fully dependent on Him? This question really helped me when I was thinking about all this before. Why would I want to BE or DO anything independently from God? I had no answer.

3,573 posted on 01/15/2010 11:29:16 PM PST by Forest Keeper ((It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2257 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
All of those verses calling for men to repent and believe are valid and represent an outward (general) calling that is consistent with God's nature in being a loving God. However, we know it is a fact (God tells us so) that not all are saved. Therefore, we are left with two choices; either Christ is a near total failure in achieving what He wants, or the outward call (theoretical) is not the same as the inward call (God takes action to ensure that His elect are saved).

Amen! God accomplishes every desire, goal and plan He has, one way or another.

"Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." -- Isaiah 41:4

3,574 posted on 01/16/2010 12:46:43 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3362 | View Replies]

To: Petronski; sitetest; Mad Dawg; boatbums; NoGrayZone; Quix; caww; Dr. Eckleburg; annalex; ...
Holy Eucharist IS God Himself.

Would you mind expanding a little on that? If you said God is love or God is truth I could nod my head in agreement. Or, if you said that the Eucharist is a ritual sacrament which includes the presence of God I could say that is my understanding of the Catholic belief. However, I've never heard that the Holy Eucharist IS God Himself.

3,575 posted on 01/16/2010 12:58:19 AM PST by Forest Keeper ((It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2301 | View Replies]

Comment #3,576 Removed by Moderator

To: Mad Dawg

My, what a long and contrived excuse for a post.


3,577 posted on 01/16/2010 1:10:43 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3339 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg; blue-duncan
We're sorry. All of our angels are busy, and we are unable to process your petition at this time. Your prayer is very important to us. Please stay on your knees and your petition will be considered in the order in which it was received.

And please note that your prayer may be monitored for quality control reasons.....

3,578 posted on 01/16/2010 1:14:36 AM PST by Forest Keeper ((It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2318 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
As I said a Catholics entire spiritual life is a 20 sec encounter with a piece of bread.

They trust in a piece of bread to make them holier and more acceptable to God..the majority of Catholics have little relationship with the word of God.

I was raised Catholic, educated catholic through college, active in the church as a lector and liturgist as well as a CCD teacher and speaker on Catholic retreats.

I praise God daily for His saving grace and mercy on one like me.. I was sought by one I did not seek...Thank you Jesus !!

Amen, Rnmomof7!!!

From darkness to light.

3,579 posted on 01/16/2010 1:17:47 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3260 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; 1000 silverlings; blue-duncan; RnMomof7; HarleyD
Re: the unpardonable sin, I read this today in 1 John 5...

16 If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that.

17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. 

 18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself,[e] and the wicked one does not touch him.

19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.

20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

It seems Paul is saying not to pray for those who commit the sin unto death since they are lost and have not been given an understanding of God. We pray for believers and all those who will eventually be brought to Him.

3,580 posted on 01/16/2010 1:34:58 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3252 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 3,541-3,5603,561-3,5803,581-3,600 ... 12,201-12,204 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