A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Got a question? We may have some answers!
Forum rules

1) This is a Christian site, respect our beliefs and we will respect yours.

2) This is a family friendly site, no swearing or posting offensive links, pictures, or signatures.

3) Please be respectful of others.

4) Trolls are not welcome and will be dealt with accordingly.

5) No racial comments, jokes or images

6) If you see a dead thread over 6 months old, let it rest in peace

7) No Duplicate posts
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Sstavix » Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:02 pm

I apologize if I came off abruptly. I just didn't want this thread to dissolve into Mormon-bashing. It's happened before....

I do have some thoughts about your response, but it would only further to derail the thread. Carry on!

Chosenchamp
Noob
Noob
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2017 3:15 am

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Chosenchamp » Thu Aug 31, 2017 3:03 pm

All I know is this, "Once I was lost, and now I am found"

Jesus is doing this type of saving and redeeming in people's lives all over the world every single day.
Denominations, religions and beliefs mean nothing if Love's not involved.
Fake religions simply melt away in the awesome presence of the source of true Love.
I'm so sorry but if your'e wrapped up in the legalistic denominations and rules of an organization then you are missing the whole point which is Love. Trust me, if you haven't experienced the Love of God, forget about everything else until you do. There is nothing like it in the universe nor will there ever be. it's the single most needed thing in existence. The Love of God can cure every disease, every sickness, every depression and every single thing that isn't perfect. It's the only thing that heals in existence.

Excuse the rant, but this is absolutely the unbdefileable truth that will never go away or change. It is always has been and always will be the Love of God that Saves, NOT RELIGION!!

User avatar
Comotto
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Comotto » Thu Aug 31, 2017 10:21 pm

All I know is this, "Once I was lost, and now I am found"

Jesus is doing this type of saving and redeeming in people's lives all over the world every single day.
Denominations, religions and beliefs mean nothing if Love's not involved.
Fake religions simply melt away in the awesome presence of the source of true Love.
I'm so sorry but if your'e wrapped up in the legalistic denominations and rules of an organization then you are missing the whole point which is Love. Trust me, if you haven't experienced the Love of God, forget about everything else until you do. There is nothing like it in the universe nor will there ever be. it's the single most needed thing in existence. The Love of God can cure every disease, every sickness, every depression and every single thing that isn't perfect. It's the only thing that heals in existence.

Excuse the rant, but this is absolutely the unbdefileable truth that will never go away or change. It is always has been and always will be the Love of God that Saves, NOT RELIGION!!
I agree, but human nature is not a one size fits all. We are created complicated. Some need earthly shepherds as well as Our Lord. Our Creator made a perfect world that is imperfect. It is in these imperfections that we are prepared for our final place that has been prepared for us.

CARZ

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Sstavix » Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:40 am

Our Creator made a perfect world that is imperfect.
This is a logical fallacy. Please elaborate.

RemnantRD
Noob
Noob
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:40 am

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby RemnantRD » Fri Sep 01, 2017 7:35 am

I believe that our Creator made a perfect world, and through sin it has become imperfect. Scripture says that our sin can even defile the land. I think that's a bit more accurate :)

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Sstavix » Fri Sep 01, 2017 3:05 pm

That does make more sense, when put that way. Thank you!

User avatar
Comotto
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby Comotto » Fri Sep 01, 2017 6:05 pm

I believe that our Creator made a perfect world, and through sin it has become imperfect. Scripture says that our sin can even defile the land. I think that's a bit more accurate :)
The Garden of Eden episode led to sin. Perfection by design included free will which allowed an imperfect decision. I'm no theologian but just my perception.

CARZ

e.daniel.box
Noob
Noob
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 3:45 pm

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby e.daniel.box » Sat Sep 02, 2017 5:58 pm

RemnantRD, thanks for your honest response. To be sure, I didn't consider your list to be "bashing" Catholicism. As you pointed out, I asked, and I'm glad you responded freely.

Unsurprisingly, I do not think that any of the 14 points you mentioned contradicts Scripture. Breaking down each point you raised and clarifying the teachings of Catholicism here would take too much time, so for now I'll focus my response on addressing (1) the veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church; and (2) the Pope and the "petros/petra" argument you raise. But I truly hope that we do break down the other points you raised in our subsequent posts on this thread.

(1) The Catholic Church does not officially teach that Mary is our "Co-Redemptrix" and "Mediatrix", but you're right to point out that many Catholics, including the clergy and bishops, sometimes refer to her as such. And it is perfectly orthodox to refer to Mary in these ways. However, as Pope Benedict XVI points out, the term "co-redemptrix" leads to confusion, because Christ alone was and is the first-cause of our salvation. As a result, I think it's probably more prudent not to refer to Mary in this way. But again, if someone does decide to refer to Mary in this way, they do not contradict the Christian faith.

Why do I say that? Because we are all God's co-workers (1 Cor. 3:9). We are Jesus' hands and feet (1 Cor. 12:12-27), such that we plant and water (spiritually speaking), but God alone causes the growth (1 Cor. 3:6). We build the kingdom, but we do so on the foundation of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 3:10-11). You and I would have never known the Gospel were it not for the work of the ministers of Jesus (Rom. 10:14). Therefore, it is absolutely true of course that Jesus is the first-cause of our salvation (as Pope Benedict pointed out), but all men have a role to play in leading others to salvation as well. Ultimately, Jesus alone saves us--His sacrifice alone (and no one else's) could have done so. But we Christians are members of Jesus' body, such that, when we act, we act "in the person of Christ" (2 Cor. 2:10). As Jesus' body, we can say, together with Paul, that it is "no longer I [who live], but Christ [who] lives in me" (Gal. 2:20). And it is in this way, then, that you and I and the other members of the body of Christ who lead others to salvation can said to be secondary causes of others' salvation.

This background helps to explain what Catholics mean when they call Mary "Co-Redemptrix" and "Mediatrix." Jesus of course is our Redeemer and sole mediator (1 Tim. 2:5). And yet, because we are members of Jesus' body, we humans too can pray for and mediate on behalf of others through Jesus (1 Tim. 2:1). So Mary is only co-redemptrix and mediatrix is a secondary--but still very unique--way. She, like us, can do nothing of eternal value without Christ. But when we consider that, were if not for Mary's "yes"--that is, her "let it be done" (Lk. 1:38)--Jesus would not have born into this world, we grow in appreciation for the unique role that Mary had to play in salvation history. In other words, although you and I and every Christian strive to evangelize and to bring others to Jesus and to salvation, Mary uniquely brought all of Jesus to all of the world. She is the mother of all "those who keep the commandments and bear witness to Jesus" (Rev. 12:17), and Scripture tells us that "all generations will call [her] blessed" (Lk. 1:48). So it is right that we venerate her, just as Jesus would have honored her as his mother in perfect compliance with the fourth commandment.

None of the veneration given to Mary takes anything away from Jesus who, unlike Mary, is God and our Savior. Catholic doctrine on Mary simply (1) affirms truths revealed about her by Scripture; and (2) encourages the faithful to live a life of unparalleled and perfect holiness, just as was done by Mary, a mere human being.

Now that this has been clarified, maybe we should discuss the Church's four official teachings on Mary (i.e. (i) mother of God; (ii) perpetually virgin; (iii) immaculately conceived; and (iv) assumed into heaven) in the next post.

(2) I'm very familiar with the "petros/petra" argument regarding Mt. 16, but I don't think it's a good one. It fails for several different reasons, among which are the fact that:

(a) the Gospel according to Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, despite what modern scholarship would have us believe, which means that Mt. 16:18 would have read, "You are 'kephas' and upon this 'kephas' I will build my church";
(b) in Mt. 16, Jesus is referencing Isaiah 22:20-24, in which God confers the authority of the King of Israel on the king's servant Eliakim, thereby making him the Royal Steward of the Kingdom, which tells us that Jesus, the King, is conferring His authority on Peter, thereby making him the Royal Steward under the new covenant; and
(c) the context and pattern of Jesus' speech in Mt. 16:17-19 show us three blessings directed at Peter--(i) that Peter is blessed, because the Father has revealed truth to him; (ii) that he is now to be called "Rock", and on that rock Jesus will build His church; and (iii) that Peter is given the keys, and so whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. In order to believe the "petros/petra" distinction argument, you have to believe that Jesus is, in one breath, celebrating and blessing Peter, but also telling Peter how unimportant and little he is. That doesn't make sense to me.

Even non-Catholic scholars are starting to concede that the "petros/petra" argument fails. For example, Baptist scholar D.A. Carson has said:

"... on the basis of the distinction between 'petros' and 'petra,' many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Peter is a mere "stone," it is alleged, but Jesus himself is the "rock," as Peter himself attests (1 Peter 2:5-8). Others adopt some other distinction: e.g. "upon this rock of revealed truth- this truth you have just confessed- I will build my church." Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretation, it is doubtful whether many would have taken 'rock' to mean anything but Peter... Had Matthew wanted to say no more than Peter was a stone in contrast with Jesus the Rock, the more common word would have been 'lithos' ('stone' of almost any size). Then there would have been no pun--and that is just the point!"

Jesus is establishing Peter in a position of authority in His Church, which is further affirmed by passages like Jn. 21:15-17 ("Feed my sheep") and Lk. 22:31-32 ("Simon...I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers"). And Scripture shows Peter exercising this authority when he orders that baptism be extended to the Gentiles (Acts 10:48), when he interprets Scripture to mean that another man should be selected to take Judas' empty office after Judas has killed himself (Acts 1:15-20), and when he decides the issue of circumcision at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:7-12). Notice that at the Council of Jerusalem, Peter stands up, decides, and all fall silent.

The historical writings of the first Christians confirm that Peter and his successors have always held a position of authority and primacy in the Church. There are many examples from these writings that I could use to show this, but for now, let me share the words of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, in 180 AD:

We shall "confound all those [believers in Jesus] who...assemble other than where is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul--that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition."

God bless.

mmcmullen3
Noob
Noob
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:39 am

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby mmcmullen3 » Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:18 pm

I will put bluntly why the scripture must be the rampart of our faith and not oral tradition. Because oral tradition over time changes and is not a good measure standard. If the scripture is given to use through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and it is written and defined for us, that is the best standard we have. Oral tradition has been manipulated, changed, and used to advantage many times in history. What cult out there does not say they have heard from the "true God". The scriptures being as consistent as they are further affirms the Divine touch of God, therefore a better basis of your faith, for any one can say they are filled with the spirit and have a NEW concept of God, in fact this is what Mohammed did, He crawled into a cave thought he saw a Demon that told him to recite, went to his wife, and she told him because he is a good man, it must have been an angel. But it is scriptures that tell us that when Angels appear they say do not Fear. This particular vision did not, hence a whole new belief formed by not using the basis of the written word, ie the Mormon religion did the same thing taking the visions of a boy in the wilderness of some new revelation after Jesus Christ, as if there would be something New and greater after the son of God, and the JW do not accept Jesus as Divine only as human. Further, JW beliefs in annihilation at death which is not what Jesus describes in Matthew, ie gnashing of teeth were the worm never dies. Hence it is the scriptures that could correct these flaws, but because these beliefs have written their own addendums it has frustrated the unity under the common flag of Christianity. I do not mind adding the 12 books of the Catholic faith which are Old Testament books to scripture but for what, they are simply historical and add no value to the Gospel or the Salvation message, ie Bel and the Dragon (why would we include) etc. And as Remnant stated there are errors that the Catholic faith has kept alive ie purgatory, when in the same message has said that Jesus conquered sin and Death. Also, it is true what someone stated in a link according to Catholic doctrine, Jw, and LDS which are all exclusive religions, if you are not of that belief you will not go to Heaven. I know God will look into my soul and make a determination of where I go for eternity and it will not be because I was Catholic, LDS, or JW, it will be because I loved Christ. - Rev. Mike McMullen

mmcmullen3
Noob
Noob
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:39 am

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby mmcmullen3 » Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:27 pm

I will also say that I was raised Catholic, and the doctrine does place Mary in the category of co-redeemer. For who do you pray to, not to Christ but to Mary. In Confession, the instruction is to pray the Rosary, well that is to Mary. I love some of the concepts of the Catholic faith that teach the ignorant by using iconography, but it has turned into idol worship, I know that was not the original intent, But the church has not tried to correct this in the masses. Despite what you have said about the Catholic faith, and not knowing who will be in Heaven with you, the Catholic Doctrine is very clear that non-catholics will not be in heaven, also the Catholic must complete all Sacraments of faith. This is why it is so urgent for a Priest to be there at the death of a Member of the church. These things are not found in scripture. Being Free Methodist, I tend to go light on the Catholic denomination, but the truth is even though the protestants initiated reformation, it is through the reformation movement of Luther that prompted the Catholic church to have its own reformation years later, so some of the things listed even the Catholic church itself determined where incorrect. Blessings Rev. Mike McMullen

User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3377
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby ArcticFox » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:59 pm

Hey Reverend, welcome to the discussion.
I will put bluntly why the scripture must be the rampart of our faith and not oral tradition. Because oral tradition over time changes and is not a good measure standard. If the scripture is given to use through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and it is written and defined for us, that is the best standard we have. Oral tradition has been manipulated, changed, and used to advantage many times in history.
Not to argue for the Catholic side of the discussion, but to be fair, I don't think the Catholics would agree that it's an oral tradition. While it's true that these traditions come from non-scriptural writings, they do come from texts that are, in many cases, centuries old so aren't quite as prone to the natural distortions that come from oral traditions in general.
the Mormon religion did the same thing taking the visions of a boy in the wilderness of some new revelation after Jesus Christ, as if there would be something New and greater after the son of God
Just a correction: The scriptural canon of the LDS Church doesn't claim to be greater than the Son of God. It's simply additional writings that support and testify of Jesus' divinity.
the JW do not accept Jesus as Divine only as human. Further, JW beliefs in annihilation at death which is not what Jesus describes in Matthew, ie gnashing of teeth were the worm never dies. Hence it is the scriptures that could correct these flaws, but because these beliefs have written their own addendums it has frustrated the unity under the common flag of Christianity.
I'm not sure I'd agree with you here. Protestant Christianity all draws form the same scriptural canon and yet has literally thousands of separate denominations, some of which differ quite starkly from each other. Further, there have been plenty of cults who drastically distort the message of Scripture even though it's the same Bible the rest of us use. Christianity's lack of unity is far more complex and nuanced than just the idea of different scripture.
LDS which are all exclusive religions, if you are not of that belief you will not go to Heaven.
Another correction: LDS Doctrine does not hold that you have to be a Mormon to go to Heaven. Being a Temple-worthy LDS will get you to the highest kingdom of Heaven, but there are other kingdoms and plenty of non-LDS Christians will be there.
I know God will look into my soul and make a determination of where I go for eternity and it will not be because I was Catholic, LDS, or JW, it will be because I loved Christ.
I agree with you in that only Heavenly Father can judge what's in our heart, but Jesus Christ did clearly state that He is the way, the truth and the light. Loving Him is a part of following Him, but plenty of people love Him yet refuse to follow Him.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens

mmcmullen3
Noob
Noob
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:39 am

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby mmcmullen3 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 2:36 am

Not to argue for the Catholic side of the discussion, but to be fair, I don't think the Catholics would agree that it's an oral tradition. While it's true that these traditions come from non-scriptural writings, they do come from texts that are, in many cases, centuries old so aren't quite as prone to the natural distortions that come from oral traditions in general.
I of course never said it was all oral, simply that the written scripture should be the measure of such and not any extended text. and I mean the same for the Mormon religion.

Just a correction: The scriptural canon of the LDS Church doesn't claim to be greater than the Son of God. It's simply additional writings that support and testify of Jesus' divinity.
It may not claim to be greater but of equal weight which is wrong.

the JW do not accept Jesus as Divine only as human. Further, JW beliefs in annihilation at death which is not what Jesus describes in Matthew, ie gnashing of teeth were the worm never dies. Hence it is the scriptures that could correct these flaws, but because these beliefs have written their own addendums it has frustrated the unity under the common flag of Christianity.

I'm not sure I'd agree with you here. Protestant Christianity all draws form the same scriptural canon and yet has literally thousands of separate denominations, some of which differ quite starkly from each other. Further, there have been plenty of cults who drastically distort the message of Scripture even though it's the same Bible the rest of us use. Christianity's lack of unity is far more complex and nuanced than just the idea of different scripture.

I am sorry you do not agree with what I have said about the JW but they simply do not accept the Divinity of Christ or the Trinity. I will add that Any delineation away from the words of Christ would be no longer following Christ that is why I listed the scripture about Jesus speaking of eternity versus annialation. Thus causing a conflict in Jesus words and the JW belief and therefore following something else, and leaving the Christian doctrine of Hell.

LDS which are all exclusive religions, if you are not of that belief you will not go to Heaven.
Another correction: LDS Doctrine does not hold that you have to be a Mormon to go to Heaven. Being a Temple-worthy LDS will get you to the highest kingdom of Heaven, but there are other kingdoms and plenty of non-LDS Christians will be there.
Hmm highest levels of Heaven reserved for LDS, hmm sounds like the same thing but ok it is still exclusive to the Religion

User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3377
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:

Re: A Question for My Non-Catholic Friends

Postby ArcticFox » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:35 am

I of course never said it was all oral, simply that the written scripture should be the measure of such and not any extended text. and I mean the same for the Mormon religion.
I understand your point. I agree that Scripture is ultimately the only reliable source. (For the record, Mormons regard the Book of Mormon as equally authoritative to the Bible, both are considered primary scriptural sources.)
It may not claim to be greater but of equal weight which is wrong.
From your point of view :wink: (Which I respect even though we disagree.) I think generally speaking, we agree that scripture is the only reliable basis for doctrine, even if we disagree on what constitutes that canon.
I am sorry you do not agree with what I have said about the JW but they simply do not accept the Divinity of Christ or the Trinity. I will add that Any delineation away from the words of Christ would be no longer following Christ that is why I listed the scripture about Jesus speaking of eternity versus annialation. Thus causing a conflict in Jesus words and the JW belief and therefore following something else, and leaving the Christian doctrine of Hell.
My comments weren't intended as a defense of JW doctrine. I really don't know enough about the Jehovah's Witnesses to comment on their beliefs either way. I only meant that there's already plenty of doctrinal divergence among Christian denominations even if you leave out restorationist perspectives.
Hmm highest levels of Heaven reserved for LDS, hmm sounds like the same thing but ok it is still exclusive to the Religion
That's true. I just wanted to clarify the point. LDS theology concerning the nature of Heaven is rather more detailed and nuanced than what you'd normally get from most other branches of Christianity.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens


Return to “Spiritual Matters”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron