Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since you are such a staunch defender of the Roman Catholic Church and what it teaches, then how come you are a Universalist considering the fact that both the Bible and the Roman Catholic church teach eternal punishment?
Excerpt:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs" (CCC 1035).
In his 1994 book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II wrote that too often "preachers, catechists, teachers . . . no longer have the courage to preach the threat of hell" (p. 183).
Concerning the reality of hell, the pope says, "In point of fact, the ancient councils rejected the theory . . . according to which the world would be regenerated after destruction, and every creature would be saved; a theory which abolished hell. . . . [T]he words of Christ are unequivocal. In Matthew’s Gospel he speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Matt. 25:46). [But] who will these be? The Church has never made any pronouncement in this regard" (pp. 185–6). The Hell There Is! | Catholic Answers
And I will point out that your church has declared that they are the only true church. In fact, my beliefs were anathematized by your church several centuries ago.
Those that anathematized you were ignorant Christians who felt their religion was the only way--------primitive men from another era.
Today you are considered a catholic with small "c" and you are considered salvation material.
Well I would say that a person should believe they are in the correct religion. If they think one is no better than any other then they are not committed to anything. To point out when you believe someone or some religion is teaching incorrect doctrine that could harm someones relationship with God and you must speak out about it.
As for people judging you as bashing just remember the only people who label the truth as hate are those who hate the truth.
I only know I know nothing.
I would never tel you my religion is better than yours.
Those that anathematized you were ignorant Christians who felt their religion was the only way--------primitive men from another era.
Today you are considered a catholic with small "c" and you are considered salvation material.
So the historical decisions of your church are not relevant? You have rather pridefully told me that they do not believe in sola scriptura. Now you're telling me that they don't believe in church authority either?
I woldnt say mainstream Christianity is better than Catholicism as much of what they do is based of Catholicism anyways in regards to the holidays they celebrate, the day they worship, and couple of other things.
Yes, Protestants are descendants of Catholicism. The RCC preserved Christianity for the world.
Quote:
The couple of main questions I asked are the heart of Catholic doctrine and go against the scripture. God said to follow his word, not man made traditions. If a disaster wiped out most of man kind and the only thing left was a bible, they would follow that and not the traditions the Catholic church has passed down.
It is very hard to let go of the concept of Sola Scriptura; I get that.
Here is the concept of tradition and Apostolic Succession:
76 In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
- orally "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";33
- in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing".34
I. THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION
76 In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
- orally "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";33
- in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing".34
. . . continued in apostolic succession
77 "In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority."35 Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."36
78 This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it.
Quote:
Always remember Christianity formed by allowing alot of Pagn doctirne to merge with the church in order to keep former pagans happy and make the merge to Christianity easier for them, so to say Catholicism has Sacred Oral Tradition has to make you question where some of the traditions came from.
Let me quote from your King James Bible. It seems no one has read this passage:
2 Thessalonians 2:15
King James Version (KJV)
15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
I hope this helps reduced the misinformation about the RCC:
So the historical decisions of your church are not relevant? You have rather pridefully told me that they do not believe in sola scriptura. Now you're telling me that they don't believe in church authority either?
How do you know what truth is?
Vizio:
Men make mistakes. There were a lot of bad Popes way back them. Furthermore, that position has been changed. Just read the Catechism.
I just know that those primitive men from another era believed their religion was better than what Luther proposed. It is basically the same thing the OP is doing. he thinks like the men from the past and believes Sola Scriptura is better.
Men make mistakes. There were a lot of bad Popes way back them. Furthermore, that position has been changed. Just read the Catechism.
So we can't depend on the church's teachings?
Quote:
I just know that those primitive men from another era believed their religion was better than what Luther proposed. It is basically the same thing the OP is doing. he thinks like the men from the past and believes Sola Scriptura is better.
So you can't believe the Bible....and you can't believe what your church teaches...How do you know what truth is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
I only know I know nothing. I cannot tell you my church is better than yours. OTOH, you are telling me your church is better.
Since you are such a staunch defender of the Roman Catholic Church and what it teaches, then how come you are a Universalist considering the fact that both the Bible and the Roman Catholic church teach eternal punishment?
Excerpt:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs" (CCC 1035).
In his 1994 book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II wrote that too often "preachers, catechists, teachers . . . no longer have the courage to preach the threat of hell" (p. 183).
Concerning the reality of hell, the pope says, "In point of fact, the ancient councils rejected the theory . . . according to which the world would be regenerated after destruction, and every creature would be saved; a theory which abolished hell. . . . [T]he words of Christ are unequivocal. In Matthew’s Gospel he speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Matt. 25:46). [But] who will these be? The Church has never made any pronouncement in this regard" (pp. 185–6). The Hell There Is! | Catholic Answers
As I said: The Church is not based on Sola Scriptura and is therefore able to grow (even if it takes more than a thousand years to make a change).
The religious philosophical concept of hell is simply "absence of God".
From the catechism:
Quote:
IV. HELL
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."
The Church is run by men and they are fallible. This idea that everything the Pope says is infallible is misinformation. He makes the same mistakes you and I make. The Pope can only be infallible when speaking from the Chair of Peter. And his words have to do with issues of faith and morality. During the entire history of the RCC the Pope has spoken from the "chair" of Peter twice. The anathema of Luther was not done from the Chair of Peter.
Quote:
So you can't believe the Bible....and you can't believe what your church teaches...How do you know what truth is?
I only know I know nothing. However, I can see errors in the bible. And I can also see errors in the RCC.
Quote:
lol....ok. How would you know?
I just told you I only know I know nothing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
