Maybe I missed something in my world history classes that took from elementary up until well into college… but I thought Catholics were the original Christians. I understood them to be the only Christians up until Martin Luther wrote the 95 Theses and all of the Protestant religions began to start forming in Europe back in the 1500s.
Works has nothing to do with salvation, either before or after. We'll have to agree to disagree on Catholics not being Christians, and I'm not a Catholic. Keep in mind my comment above about the rules of religion.
Morning Saddlebum. Cooler weather is here. Continue the journey and run the race, finish strong. God still has wonderful sights he wants you to see and gifts he wants to bestow on you. I’m praying for you brother. Call if you need anything.
What religion says means nothing. What the Bible says means everything.
Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
If you have salvation it is a gift from God. God doesn't do take backs of His gift.. If you have this gift you will walk in good works.
We don't work to have salvation but if we have it we have good works.
Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
If you have salvation it is a gift from God. God doesn't do take backs of His gift.. If you have this gift you will walk in good works.
We don't work to have salvation but if we have it we have good works.
No it’s not but that is exactly what Jesus was talking about. Sadly men have perverted the text to fit their wants. It’s easy to find the truth. Being born again of water and the spirit is talking about being baptized as Peter spoke of in Acts 2:38. We bury our old sinful selfs in the watery grave of baptism. As soon as we come up out of the water we are born again a new creation and have been given the Holy Spirit. That is the ONLY way to truly be saved and receive the Holy Spirit. Once saved always saved is a man made lie. Much like the “salvation prayer”.Is the word baptism in the text? The reference is that one must be born again through a spiritual birth. Btw this is not meant to be a debate on theology.
Well you have missed a lot then. Because Catholics were NOT the original Christians. I suggest you dig a little deeper. Catholics have made a mockery of true Christianity. The first century Christians were the first Christians. This includes the Apostles.
But I want to apologize to the OP, I didn’t mean to turn this into something else. I am praying for you.
To your last sentence, it depends. Sins are either mortal or venial. Mortal sins bring Hell, while venial (minor) sins do not. Those with venial sins will go to Purgatory to do penance for the sins they did not do penance for on Earth, while those with mortal sins go to Hell. Some spend a short time in Purgatory, but others may spend longer. Hell is eternal, though.
A note on still having to do penance for sins. My father told me a story to me this last week (we weren't even discussing religion, it just happens to fit this discussion). When he was a teenager, he damaged his dad's car in a minor accident. Then he went on to lie about it. Shortly after, he admitted the truth. His father made him work as a roofer in his company for the rest of the summer. His father forgave him, but a punishment still had to be served for the transgressions.
Uh, what? I truly wonder if some of you just make this up as you go to fit your world view. The Catholic Church traces its foundation to Christ naming Peter the head of his Church. We are, indeed, a Christian religion. I would lend to bet that most of the "anti-Catholics" on this board know nothing more of the Catholic Church than what they have heard from other people, not what they have actually researched themselves. I was raised non-denominational Protestant when I was a kid. I went on a religious journey during college and when I began reading the Catholic Catechism, every point made complete sense. My journey ended. If anyone wants to debate on Catholic theology I'd be glad to do it via private message.
I’ll debate it with you all you want. But I know nothing will change your mind. For starters Christ did not name Peter the head of His church. I can pull out the Greek and show you what Christ actually said. I have researched the Catholic Church more than many actual Catholics. I’ve also done the same for many denominations. So you read a book that was written by Catholics and that’s what made you want to be a Catholic? Why isn’t the Bible sufficient? Venial and mortal sins is a made up Catholic thing. We do not go to purgatory. That is another made up thing.
Mods, can this thread be edited to move the discussion being had that does not pertain to saddlebums question to a different thread?
Please know that I have no ill feelings toward those who are Catholics. However, those who are in that religion must come to terms with the fact that the Roman Catholic church is not the church that you read about in the Bible. The Catholic church started at the wrong time (606 A.D) and in the wrong place (Rome). Actually, the Catholic Church was five hundred years in the making, developing slowly into the first denominational church. While there were Popes that existed before 606 A.D., it was at that time that a man, Boniface III, took on universal headship.
There are many doctrinal errors espoused by the Catholic church that we might address, but the cornerstone of Catholicism is the office of the Pope. Catholics believe that the Pope is the head of the church on earth so that any laws he set forth, even if those laws are contrary to scripture, must stand as being authoritative. Years ago, I had a discussion with a priest in the Catholic church which centered around their law forbidding marriage. I referred him to 1 Timothy 4:1-3 which clearly shows that the doctrine which forbids marriage is of the devil. His only response was that since the Pope had decreed that priests are not to marry, they cannot marry. The Pope has the final word because he is the representative of Christ on earth. They believe that whatever he binds on earth is bound in heaven.
The supremacy of the Pope is said to go back to Peter. Catholics believe that all of the Popes that they have had are simply successors of Peter. If it can be proven that Peter was not the first Pope, the cornerstone of Catholicism is removed, the foundation crumbles, and the entire superstructure falls. So, consider the following:
Peter Is Not the Head of the Church on Earth
Catholicism teaches that Peter was made supreme head of the church on earth. Where is the scripture for that? Was Peter ever called the head of the church on earth? The answer is no! The only mention of anyone being head over the church is in reference to Christ (Ephesians 1:22-23; 5:23; Colossians 1:18). He is the only head the church has ever had. The church belongs to Him because He purchased it with His own blood (Acts 20:28). He is the only one who can set forth legislation regarding the church, and all the legislation He has set forth is in the Word of God. No man, the Pope or otherwise, has the authority to make laws or to override the laws that are found in the New Testament.
Peter Is Not the Foundation of the Church
Another error believed by Catholics is that Peter is the foundation of the church. This is in clear contradiction to what Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 3:11. By inspiration, Paul declares that Christ is the foundation of the church, not Peter. Why do Catholics believe that Peter is the foundation of the church? It is because of the statement made by Jesus in Matthew 16:18. They interpret the words of our Savior to mean that Peter was the rock upon which He would build His church, emphasizing that the name Peter means rock. However, the name Peter comes from the Greek word Petros which is masculine in gender. The word that Jesus used was Petra which is feminine in gender. If Peter is the rock that Jesus was talking about, then the church has a human foundation and Matthew 16:18 contradicts 1 Corinthians 3:11. The rock Jesus alluded to was not Peter, but the truth of Peter’s statement made in verse 16, i.e., that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The church would be built upon Jesus and the truth that He is God’s only begotten Son.
Peter Was Not the Head Apostle
The final thing that Catholics teach and believe concerning Peter being the first Pope is that he had authority over the other apostles. Is this conclusion borne out by the scriptures? No! All the apostles were equal in authority. If Peter was the head of the rest of them, and he had the final word on all matters, why did the other apostles contend with him after he converted the household of Cornelius (Acts 11:1-4)? If Peter was the chief apostle, why did Paul and Barnabas meet with the apostles in Jerusalem to settle the question of Gentiles being circumcised? Why didn’t Peter, as the Pope, just set forth the law? If Peter was the head apostle, why did Paul say that he was not behind any of the apostles in 2 Corinthians 11:5? The truth is Jesus delegated equal authority to all the apostles. All of their teachings were binding (Matthew 18:18). If one rejected the words of any of the apostles they stood condemned (Luke 10:16). All of the apostles were ambassadors of Christ, not just Peter.
The apostles had no successors for no one today fits the qualifications of an apostle. To be an apostle one must be an eye-witness to the resurrection of Christ, and not one of the Popes fills that qualification. Based on these facts, we know that Peter was not the first Pope. Catholics should consider these truths carefully and leave their traditions behind.
Similar threads
