Difference between Catholic and Protestant.

[theefaith]

You don't understand the meaning of baptism. It is indicative of burial. Sprinkling doesn't accomplish that. Read Romans 6.

baptism, which symbolizes death of the old life (going under water) and the emergence of the new life (coming up from the water).

there ya go!

 

[theefaith]

You keep saying that. My position stays the same.

The Catholic church is no longer and will never again be my church. Not sure how many more times I can say it to you.

We can discuss this in Heaven when we get there. Deal?

then you reject Christ!
He only has one church one bride and he don’t believe in divorce!

so your outside the new covenant church which he alone founded on Peter and the apostles

 

[Naomanos]

then you reject Christ!

I have not, no matter how many times you proclaim it.

 

[Illuminator]

I will respectfully disagree with your post.

I am not returning to the Catholic church, not when I disagree with many of its doctrines. That would make me a hypocrite. Nor am I rejecting Christ.

That's 3 times you've stated you disagree with many of its doctrines but haven't stated which ones. Care to enlighten us? Which one bothers you the most? Hopefully we can discuss it in a civil manner for the benefit of all.

 

[Naomanos]

That's 3 times you've stated you disagree with many of its doctrines but haven't stated which ones. Care to enlighten us? Which one bothers you the most? Hopefully we can discuss it in a civil manner for the benefit of all.

I have stated that I will not do that. I have stated them before ad-nauseam elsewhere. Not going to do it again.

I will state, again, that I will never return to the Catholic church. I hold no ill will towards the Catholic church and have found my church where I belong. The fact that I found a church should be a joyous occasion.

 

[atpollard]

we have no uncertainty

True, you are CERTAIN that you are not presently saved (By the confession of your lips “no one is saved until the end” … so you may or may not reach the goal).

 

[Brakelite]

when and where did Adventism begin?

Adventism, that is hope in the seconds coming, began as aNT concept 40 days after the resurrection on the mount of olives... See Acts 1:11.
Seventh Day Adventism began at the same time as all those disciples who witnessed that event were Sabbath keepers.
So. 33AD... PALESTINE.

 

[Brakelite]

Hmmmm......comparing a larger-than-life memorial to Protestant men (all who disagreed with each other about the Truth of Scripture) to a small statue of the Mother of God IS a bit of a stretch.....

While you ignore what is actually going on in front of them.

 

[michaelvpardo]

You have nothing to say about any one of the 4 hyperlinks in post #859 because you are afraid of them.

What part of "we don't worship images of any kind" don't you understand?
What verse in the Bible forbids SCRIPTURE in ART FORM??? Here's a clue: there isn't any; it's another one of your man-made traditions (conjured up by rabid Calvinoid iconoclasm.)
I noticed you RAN from post #859, and delude yourself into thinking that if you can fool everybody with the same boring drum pounding, the same stupid false charge of idolatry. I have news for you. Not everyone is that stupid.

Joseph Goebbels, minister of propaganda for the German Third Reich: “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”.

Do Catholics Worship Statues?

I have nothing to say because more lies contribute nothing to my understanding, nor do you.

 

[Brakelite]

Fundamentalism drives a wedge between Christ and his church,

It is the true meaning of Antichrist that had divided the Church, that is the original body of true believers, from Christ. It was your church that replaced Christ with vicarious filli dei.
It was your church which replaced the intercession of Christ with that of Mary, and dead guys.
It was your church that replaced the way of Christ's salvation through grace by faith in His blood and self sacrifice with a works based salvation of sacraments and earning through indulgences granted as a result of piety, prayers, fastng, pilgrimages, visitations to holy shrines etc etc etc. Works.
It was your church that replaced the hope of the resurrection of the righteous at Christ's second coming by pretending souls are independent living people who have natural immortality and go immediately to heaven, hell, or some other place after death. A pagan belief at best. An occult satanic counterfeit at worst.
It was your church that defied God and replaced His only declared sacred holy day, the 7th day Sabbath, with a day dedicated to the Mithraic sun god of Constantine concerning which there is no biblical Commandment.
It was your church that replaced the work and ministry of the holy Spirit of Christ who inspired the authors of the divine scriptures, who was promised to believers that they may understand those same scriptures, removing Christ and His Spirit as a relational loving God to a God to be feared, requiring human mediators such as the college of Cardinals to rule over the church instead of Christ, the magisterium to interpret the scriptures instead of the Spirit of Christ, and the Pope to be the head of the church instead of Christ. In other words, Antichrist. Instead of Christ. Vicarious filli dei. Vicar of the Son of God. 666.
Come out of her thee faith. Of not you shall partake of the same plagues that God shall pour out upon this counterfeit interloper when it is destroyed in the final days.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Your theory is that the Jews didn't write the Scriptures. Just to be clear the OT is Scripture. The OT are Jewish laws (for a lack of better words). Jewish people put pen to paper and wrote the OT. I noticed your little caveat there that "there was only one real author." You are right. God is the author....but men wrote! Jewish men wrote the OT. Christian men wrote the NT. So, now to destroy your opinion that the Jews didn't write what God inspired them to write.

Was Moses a Jew? Yup. Did he write parts of the OT? Yup.
What Books Of The Bible Did Moses Write? | Jack Wellman (patheos.com)
What Are the Five Books of Moses? - Essentials (chabad.org)

Who wrote Psalms (the book of the OT we are discussing)? David is accredited with writing most of Psalms. Moses also! Was David Jewish? Yup
Who Actually Wrote Psalms? (biblestudytools.com)
Who Wrote the Book of Psalms? - Questions & Answers (chabad.org)

Sorry to destroy your theory with facts.

Clearly you're a pagan and have no clue about the prophetic word and the writing of the pentateuch. The first 5 books of scripture were written by Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but I do understand that this is contested by the pagan RCC scholars.

 

[Brakelite]

It aint you my friend . And yes indeed you are correct , the ecuminical movement has infected ALL denomiations .
The other person i speak about , cannot see that the ecuminical movment has infected even the SDA as it has all other groups .
There are leaders in every camp that are decieving their groups and now they do the bidding of the We are one unity movement .
ITS all over the watchtower , its all over the southern baptist region , ITS all over the places .
Folks that once stood against the harlot now do her will for the sake of unity and those who sit under them
have no idea its getting done . SEE the devil is highly clever . HE cometh to preach the agenda
to a baptist but does so within the mind of the baptist . He does it to an adventist but in within the mind of that religoin
as well as any other religion . THE GOAL IS , WE ARE ONE LETS HUG AND HAVE US SOME GET ALONG BRIDGE BULDING UNITY .
ITS ALL a lie and that from hades . THE MORMONS LEAD IN IT . THE CATHOLICS LEAD IN IT , THE JEWS LEAD IN IT
as well as the evangelical realm and its nar leaders , its beth moores and its todd whites and its stephen furticks
its rob bells , Its rick warrnen purpose driven life . ITS EVERYWHERE .
I SHUN Its false love , is false unity , its false agenda and its doctrines TO HELL . DONT Wait for an apology either .
ITS THE BIBLE FOR ME MY FRIEND and the GOD and CHRIST OF said bible .
WE BETTER be prepared to be hated . WE BETTER stay GLUED IN BIBLES . Cause many AINT GONNA MAKE IT .

 

[Brakelite]

[QUOTE="Brakelite, post: 1433658, member:

SDA crushed with truth of the Christian doctrine of the necessity of correct faith in the divinity of Christ and the holy trinity and baptismal regeneration in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the Holy Spirit as Christ commanded His one true church founded 2000 yrs ago on Peter and the apostles!

It is presumption that declares scripture to be true that Christ established His church, and then declare that church to be yours upon no other evidence other than some obscure and misapplied historical links. Jesus said by their fruit ye shall know them. Take a good hard look at history without the rose tinted spectacles. While Catholics excuse their evil history with the quip, there were a few bad popes but that didn't affect the true church's teachings, the real truth that underlies all of that history is that persecution, murder, destruction, power, and self glory, have always been the Hallmark of Rome, both pagan Rome under the Caesars, and papal Rome under the inheritors to the pagan throne, the Popes. Those brutal histories shared by both powers are not the result of a few bad eggs, but a result of evil apostasy and rejection of Christ and enshrined principles within church dogma which you alone on this forum was honest enough to admit to in several occasions and support. That persecution and eradication of who you call heretics is true catholicism. It is not Christianity.

 

[Brakelite]

baptism, which symbolizes death of the old life (going under water) and the emergence of the new life (coming up from the water).

there ya go!

Exactly... Thank you. And you recognize it as a symbol, which I agree with. A public symbolic act of a previously established voluntary decision on the part of the Christian to sacrifice self through Christ... To account himself as dead with Christ on the cross, and reckon himself raised with Him, and had therefore become a new creature, born again of the Spirit of God, and receiving the promise of the holy Spirit confirming the promise of eternal life.
"There is therefore no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" Romans 8:1.
There is no injunction upon Christians to join and submit to the authority of a finite sinful fallible man who sees himself as Christ's replacement on earth.
KJV 1 John 1:2-3
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us.
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

 

[Brakelite]

As I showed you before – it was CHRIST Himself who gave His Church supreme earthly Authority – that WHATEVER the Church loosed or held bound on earth would be loosed and held bound in Heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18).
That WHOEVER listens to or rejects His Church listens to or rejects HIM - and the ONE who sent Him (Luke 10:16).
He gave the Leaders of His Church the power to forgive sins or to hold them bound – and sealed that power with the Holy Spirit (John 20:21-23).
This is BIBLICAL Truth – not Catholic opinion.

Indeed. I agree with you. Christ gave His church authority, and the gifts of the Spirit. But not yours. Your church began well. It was apostolic. In the first century. But after Constantine made Christianity the state religion, and mixed his pagan beliefs with Christian beliefs, the church descended into a long slide into apostasy and sin. It became a church founded on tradition as opposed to scripture, teaching as commandments the doctrine of man, which evolved into a round of sacramentalism and ritualism that now absolutely no resemblance to the church in it's purity of the first century. That decline didn't happen overnight. And it didn't happen everywhere where there were churches established by the apostles and their emissaries. But it did happen in Rome. And it did happen in Alexandria.
The faith that Christians strive for today is based on the faith once delivered to the saints of the church in the wilderness, and in those places that for centuries was unaffected by the situation in Europe. Iona for example and the church and mission schools established by Columbanus, who for decades along with his students dedicated themselves to reproducing the scriptures in their native tongue.
The church of the east who inherited the scriptures from Antioch, not Rome. Who were established by missionaries from Asia, India, having no connection or desire to submit to papal authority, but had Christ as their Head, and converted millions of pagans to Christianity throughout the east as far as China, Japan, and the Philippines, centuries before any Catholics set foot in their land.
From whence suppose you that the children of Genghis Khan received their faith? From Rome? Never!

 

[Brakelite]

Hopefully we can discuss it in a civil manner for the benefit of all.

That would be nice.

 

[Brakelite]

Then Jesus must be pagan because He rose on Sunday according to your absurd reasoning.[/U][/I][/B]

The pagan influence fallacy is in fact, a fallacy, and your fallacious reasoning has been exposed repeatedly.

Whenever one encounters a proposed example of pagan influence, one should demand that its existence be properly documented from primary sources or through reliable, scholarly secondary sources. After receiving documentation supporting the claim of a pagan parallel, one should ask a number of questions:

Is there a parallel? Frequently, there is not.
The claim of a parallel may be erroneous, especially when the documentation provided is based on an old or undisclosed source. For example: “The Egyptians had a trinity. They worshiped Osiris, Isis, and Horus, thousands of years before the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were known” (Robert Ingersoll, Why I Am an Agnostic). This is not true. The Egyptians had an Ennead—a pantheon of nine major gods and goddesses. Osiris, Isis, and Horus were simply three divinities in the pantheon who were closely related by marriage and blood and who figured in the same myth cycle. They did not represent the three persons of a single divine being (the Christian understanding of the Trinity). The claim of an Egyptian trinity is simply wrong.

Is the parallel dependent or independent?
Even if there is a pagan parallel, that does not mean that there is a causal relationship involved. The idea that similar forms are always the result of diffusion from a common source has long been rejected by archaeology and anthropology, and for very good reason: Humans are similar to each other and live in similar (i.e., terrestrial) environments, leading them to have similar cultural artifacts and views. For example, Fundamentalists have made much of the fact that Catholic art includes Madonna and Child images and that non-Christian art, all over the world, also frequently includes mother and child images. There is nothing sinister in this.

The fact is that, in every culture, there are mothers who hold their children! Sometimes this gets represented in art, including religious art, and it especially is used when a work of art is being done to show the motherhood of an individual. Mother-with child-images do not need to be explained by a theory of diffusion from a common, pagan religious source (such as Hislop’s suggestion that such images stem from representations of Semiramis holding Tammuz). One need look no further than the fact that mothers holding children is a universal feature of human experience and a convenient way for artists to represent motherhood.

Is the parallel antecedent or consequent?
Even if there is a pagan parallel that is causally related to a non-pagan counterpart, this does not establish which gave rise to the other. It may be that the pagan parallel is a late borrowing from a non-pagan source. Frequently, the pagan sources we have are so late that they have been shaped in reaction to Jewish and Christian ideas.

Sometimes it is possible to tell that pagans have been borrowing from non-pagans. Other times, it cannot be discerned who is borrowing from whom (or, indeed, if anyone is borrowing from anyone). For example: The ideas expressed in the Norse Elder Edda about the end and regeneration of the world were probably influenced by the teachings of Christians with whom the Norse had been in contact for centuries (H. A. Guerber, The Norsemen, 339f).

Is the parallel treated positively, neutrally, or negatively?
Even if there is a pagan parallel to a non-pagan counterpart, that does not mean that the item or concept was enthusiastically or uncritically accepted by non-pagans. One must ask how they regarded it. Did they regard it as something positive, neutral, or negative?

For example: Circumcision and the symbol of the cross might be termed “neutral” Jewish and Christian counterparts to pagan parallels. It is quite likely that the early Hebrews first encountered the idea of circumcision among neighboring non-Jewish peoples, but that does not mean they regarded it as a religiously good thing for non-Jews to do. Circumcision was regarded as a religiously good thing only for Jews because for them it symbolized a special covenant with the one true God (Gen. 17). The Hebrew scriptures are silent in a religious appraisal of non-Jewish circumcision.

Similarly, the early Christians who adopted the cross as a symbol did not do so because it was a pagan religious symbol (the pagan cultures which use it as a symbol, notably in East Asia and the Americas, had no influence on the early Christians). The cross was used as a Christian symbol because Christ died on a cross. Christians did not adopt it because it was a pagan symbol they liked and wanted to copy.

Examples of negative parallels are often found in Genesis. For instance, the Flood narrative (Gen. 6-9) has parallels to pagan flood stories, but is written so that it refutes ideas in them. Thus Genesis attributes the flood to human sin (6:5-7), not overpopulation, as Atrahasis’ Epic and the Greek poem Cypria did. The presence of flood stories in cultures around the world does not undermine the validity of the biblical narrative, but lends it more credence.

Criticism, refutation, and replacement are also the principles behind modern holidays being celebrated to a limited extent around the same time as former pagan holidays. In actuality, reports of Christian holidays coinciding with pagan ones are often inaccurate (Christmas does not occur on Saturnalia, for example). However, to the extent the phenomenon occurs at all, Christian holidays were introduced to provide a wholesome, non-pagan alternative celebration, which thus critiques and rejects the pagan holiday.

This is the same process that leads Fundamentalists who are offended at the (inaccurately alleged) pagan derivation of Halloween to introduce alternative “Reformation Day” celebrations for their children. (This modern Protestant holiday is based on the fact that the Reformation began when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany, on October 31, 1517.) Another Fundamentalist substitution for Halloween has been “harvest festivals” that celebrate the season of autumn and the gathering of crops. These Fundamentalist substitutions are no more “pagan” than the celebrations of days or seasons that may have been introduced by earlier Christians.

Historical truth prevails
Ultimately, all attempts to prove Catholicism “pagan” fail. To make a charge of paganism stick, one must be able to show more than a similarity between something in the Church and something in the non-Christian world. One must be able to demonstrate a legitimate connection between the two, showing clearly that one is a result of the other, and that there is something wrong with the non-Christian item.

In the final analysis, nobody has been able to prove these things regarding a doctrine of the Catholic faith, or even its officially authorized practices.
Is Catholicism Pagan?

My point was concerning Sunday sacredness. A day formerly dedicated to the sun god, and borrowed by the church without any biblical l mandate for doing so. It was the Catholic Church council at Laodicea that formerly ratified and established that day as sacred to Christianity... Changing the 4th commandment with a man made tradition. The rest of your post was irrelevant to that one truth.

 

[Brakelite]

The Church isn’t some weird little club invented by a false prophetess in the 19th century.
It’s the Body of Christ Himself

Absolutely true. Such a pity that you can't see that.

 

[Phoneman777]

only one has the keys of jurisdictional authority

did Christ give the keys to a confession?

did a confession miraculously catch a fish with a coin in its mouth to pay the temple tax for both Christ and Peter identifying them as one in Matt 17:27

Did a confession stand up in acts 1 and quote the Old Testament and appoint Mathias as an apostle?

Did a confession give the first sermon in acts 2?

did a man in acts 3:6 receive a miracle thru a confession?

Did a man in acts 5:5 fall dead at the feet of a confession?

did a confession preach the necessity of baptismal regeneration in acts 2:38-39 and 1 pet 3:20-21?

"I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I (Jesus) am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."

NOT PETER

 

[Phoneman777]

represents the flight into Egypt

who is the child?

So, Mary fled with the child Jesus AFTER Jesus "caught up to God and to His throne"?

...because it says the woman (church) fled into the wilderness AFTER Jesus was caught up there...in the book of Acts...when the disciples saw Him go up as they stood there gazing at Him.