The Town Hall Archives Ahh, the nostalgia.     Search   Memberlist   Log in  Catholics Vs. Evangelicals      The Town Hall Forum Index -> Impolite Company Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Jared Cute and Cuddly Joined: 23 Nov 2002 Posts: 4672 Location: Pennsylvania Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:33 pm    Post subject: rosie wrote: What is extreme unction? The Catholic Encyclopedia describes extreme unction as follows: "A sacrament of the New Law instituted by Christ to give spiritual aid and comfort and perfect spiritual health, including, if need be, the remission of sins, and also, conditionally, to restore bodily health, to Christians who are seriously ill; it consists essentially in the unction by a priest of the body of the sick person, accompanied by a suitable form of words." Full article here. Extreme unction is the actual name for that which is commonly termed "last rites." Also, to return to something you said earlier: rosie wrote: I don't know if it's wrong, but Catholics sure do have some good verses to back up what they believe about salvation. Not that I agree with them, of course. For instance "For by GRACE are ye saved" and "born of water and of spirit" and such. "For by grace are ye saved" supports the sacraments? Now, sure, they're all about grace, but it's about grace we have to bring upon ourselves by meeting a set of conditions not found in scripture. Biblical Christianity recognizes that God's grace is shown in His unequivocal pardon of our sin at the moment of salvation. Jeremy The Great Debater Joined: 03 Jan 2003 Posts: 448 Location: Arizona, USA Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:41 pm    Post subject: hawkeye wrote: Jeremy wrote: The Bible also says: "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!" (Galatians 1:6-9 NIV.) Yes, and there are other similar verses. However, a valid question is raised of what is the correct doctrine Paul speaks of? This of course is found largely between Matthew and Jude. And, I fail to see what some people believe as fitting the guidelines for false prophet, or failing to fit the lines of what is true doctrine. What doctrine is Paul talking about? He says exactly what he is talking about--the Gospel. He uses the word "gospel" 5 times in that passage I quoted. The whole epistle is talking about the true Gospel (Good News) of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection alone plus nothing. "But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you." (2:5 NASB) "But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, 'If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews? We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified." (2:14-16 NASB) "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9 NASB) hawkeye wrote: Jeremy wrote: We all know that Christians do differ a little on their definitions of what a cult is. I do think, along with most other Christians, that their are certain important points and characteristics of a cult, as I alluded to in my first post. Agreed. However, you would be better off saying "false teacher/prophet/doctrine" than cult, as that is less ambigious. However, as that is less ambigious, you must be more concise as to why you say such when refering to people who agree with the important points. That is usually a challenge. So, God knows our hearts, and the truth, so while we are free to disagree, why should we judge on whether or not someone is a 'cult' when we cant know? All we do is tir up contention and cause division--sectarianism. If the issue were important, that would be one thing, but most issues deemed important arent. And, we have a better chance of showing the 'deviants' the truth by loving them as the brothers and sisters they are, not cutting them off because they do things a little differently than you, while still being within the Biblical guidelines. And, no, I do NOT try to unify unbelievers or those who DO deviate from what the Bible is clear on. But of the issues the Bible is not very clear on? "In essentials, unity In nonessentials, diversity In all things, charity." Not a bad way for the church to live. The Gospel is one of the essentials. The Gospel is an important thing--the most important thing. The sufficiency of Scripture is an essential. Coralfish wrote: hawkeye wrote: Jeremy wrote: The official teaching of the Catholic Church is very similar to that of other cults, and that is that if a person has known the Catholic Church is the true church then they must become a Catholic in order to be saved. And if someone is a Catholic then they must remain a Catholic in order to be saved. I also note the word "Catholic" has dual meanings; refering to the denomination, and refering to the 'universal' church (i.e. as used in the Nicean Creed) Once again, may I defer to whomever it was that mentioned that the Catholic church has changed vastly. Using an example that was prevalent in the middle ages when church leaders were corrupted for various reaons, cannot fit a modern-day model. Keep in mind that, though corrupted church leaders may have taught one thing or another, it does not speak to the whole of the beliefs. To find those, one must dig deeper than a few personal examples. At the same time, I believe this goes for almost any Christian organization. Suppose you're a Baptist, and a particular radical minister decides to preach that, unless you are a Baptist you won't be going to Heaven. Do you believe the minister, or the Baptist beliefs and traditions of that denomination up to that point? Jeremy wrote: I was not quoting, but I can get you an exact quote, if you want. However, the statements by the Catholic Church are certainly not talking about the universal body of believers (lower case 'c' catholic church). It depends upon the context. In the apostolic creed as recited by Catholics and [many] protestants, the meaning of the word "catholic" is used in the same sense by both. If you refer to statements by those claiming one needs to be a member of the "Catholic" church to be saved, then I defer to the above statement. I said what I was talking about--the official teachings of the church, not some radical member saying something the rest of the church does not believe. catholic.com: "They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does—that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC 846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC 847). "Notice that the same Fathers who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics. [...] "However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity." staycatholic.com: "Their conflicting thoughts would accuse them if they suspected but ignored the fact that God required them to be members of His Church. As Vatican II put it in it's 'Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity (Ad Gentes Divinitus),' 'Hence, those cannot be saved, who knowing that the Catholic Church was founded through Jesus Christ, by God, as something necessary, still refuse to enter it or remain in it' (no. 7). Their conflicting thoughts would excuse them if they truly sought God but were unaware of this requirement. "Dissenting Catholics, Traditionalist or otherwise, would do well to read the letter of the Holy Office concerning Fr. Leonard Feeney, who also dissented on this issue. It states in part, 'But this dogma [No Salvation outside the Church] is to be understood as the Church itself understands it. For our Savior did not leave it to private judgment to explain what is contained in the deposit of faith, but to the doctrinal authority of the Church.'" Those quotes say exactly what I said: Jeremy wrote: The official teaching of the Catholic Church is very similar to that of other cults, and that is that if a person has known the Catholic Church is the true church then they must become a Catholic in order to be saved. And if someone is a Catholic then they must remain a Catholic in order to be saved. Coralfish wrote: Jeremy wrote: Coralfish wrote: Do Catholics hold God to be the center of their life? Do they hold Scripture to be the inspired Word of God? Do they believe in commmunion with other members, and the building up of faith, family and community? Do they believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins? Do they believe that we sin, and therefore must strive to be better individuals, and thus grow closer to God? Do they believe in death, judgement, Heaven and Hell? The answer (excluding radical factions of individual-not endorsed or held to be in line with church teaching) is yes. How many such responses could you apply to, say, Mormans or Jehova's witnesses or any other cult? Most Mormons and JWs would probably answer yes to all of those questions. I highly doubt that Mormons believe in death, judgement, heaven or hell in the same way that Christians do. It would even be a stretch to call the Morman's belief in an everlasting reward "heaven". And Catholics also would have different definitions on some of those things than mainstream evangelicals. That was my point. Just because a religion answers yes to those things, they may have different definitions. And, as I said, the question of what the religion adds to those things is also very important. Jeremy Last edited by Jeremy on Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:08 pm; edited 1 time in total rosie Inquisitive Member Joined: 07 Jan 2003 Posts: 1197 Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:51 pm    Post subject: Jared wrote: rosie wrote: What is extreme unction? The Catholic Encyclopedia describes extreme unction as follows: "A sacrament of the New Law instituted by Christ to give spiritual aid and comfort and perfect spiritual health, including, if need be, the remission of sins, and also, conditionally, to restore bodily health, to Christians who are seriously ill; it consists essentially in the unction by a priest of the body of the sick person, accompanied by a suitable form of words." Full article here. Extreme unction is the actual name for that which is commonly termed "last rites." Also, to return to something you said earlier: rosie wrote: I don't know if it's wrong, but Catholics sure do have some good verses to back up what they believe about salvation. Not that I agree with them, of course. For instance "For by GRACE are ye saved" and "born of water and of spirit" and such. "For by grace are ye saved" supports the sacraments? Now, sure, they're all about grace, but it's about grace we have to bring upon ourselves by meeting a set of conditions not found in scripture. Biblical Christianity recognizes that God's grace is shown in His unequivocal pardon of our sin at the moment of salvation. I was not trying to support the sacraments. I've never heard my catholic friends cite those conditions, and they're anything but ignorant. I thought the issue was baptism, as well as something about faith vs grace, or something.... hawkeye Linux Geek Joined: 23 Nov 2002 Posts: 2408 Location: Inventors Corner Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:12 pm    Post subject: Jared wrote: To start with the last thing really said, the quote from Augustine: It may seem like a minor point, I suppose, but Augustine said "In non-essentials, liberty" -- not "diversity." Diversity of belief for the mere sake of diversity makes no sense whatsoever in any age. Thank you for that, I did indeed misquote. Shadowpaw He Lies in Shadows Joined: 23 Nov 2002 Posts: 927 Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:28 pm    Post subject: This debate is absurd. Every single person on this board has a set of beliefs and values that are not going to be fully acceptable to someone else. And of course everyone will turn to the Bible for passages or phrases to back it up. Well, the Bible is a very large book... if someone is so desperate to find a passage that will fit well with their argument, they will find it. Instead of thinking up angles and topics to approach this issue, ask yourself what you hope to accomplish. If you are trying to tell the number of Catholics on this board that they are going to hell, you have your work cut out for you. I'd say the percentage of Catholics who are unsaved are equal to those in your particular sect as well. If you are trying to convert them to your belief system, again, you'll have your work cut out for you. Or if you are trying to answer the original question that was posed, which was whether or not Catholics are cults. I have the answer for you: you've already got the answer you want in your head. The word "Cult" is defined (clearly as pointed out in this thread) differently everywhere and no matter what people say, everyone is going to hold on to what they've been taught regarding it's implications. The basis of the faith has always been that a Christian must accept Jesus Christ as her or her savior. And with that belief in place, will a person not bear good fruits in their effort to emulate the teachings and life of Christ? The scariest word to Christians seems to be "sacraments". Why? Because people fear what that implies. I don't think Catholics are going to stop bearing their good fruits because they confess their sins to God as well as a Priest, or that they eat the Body of Christ on a weekly basis rather than monthly. And if, once reaching a certain age, a boy or girl is allowed to confirm for themselves that they accept Jesus into their hearts, should we not rejoice? Sacraments are not requirements for salvation... but they are tools to reinforce the sacrifice Jesus made. So what though, right? You don't agree with me. I encourage you to quote me and then point out a Biblical passage that supports your theory. Then another member will quote you and highlight another passage that suggests you are wrong... and then another, and then another, and it never stops. These debates are trying to prove something that has no proof! There is no right or wrong answer here, only people's beliefs. Considering the very well informed arguments that have been made thus far, I would encourage many of you to use those talents in a more constructive way. Tearing down other Christians and their beliefs are simply a waste of time, and serve only to divide, not unite, those who believe in Jesus as the Savior. Shadowpaw Amadeo Senior Member Joined: 14 Sep 2003 Posts: 1207 Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:27 am    Post subject: Good post, Shadowpaw. Disco Dan Scholarly Artist Joined: 27 Dec 2003 Posts: 3723 Location: In the land of Deep but not Profound... Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:33 pm    Post subject: Indeed. VERY good post, Mr. Paw. Sorry I missed this debate, maybe I'll get into it more when I've finished reading it. Jarem11 Junior Member Joined: 23 Dec 2004 Posts: 133 Location: IN: THE VILLAGE Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:02 pm    Post subject: I I respect everybodys opinion, i may not believe or like it but i will listen and agree/disagree soo, and just 2 let yall know my opinions: i am a messianic Jew....soo...u shuld be able 2 tell by that that i dont completely agree with the catholics or lots o people. Disco Dan Scholarly Artist Joined: 27 Dec 2003 Posts: 3723 Location: In the land of Deep but not Profound... Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:24 pm    Post subject: Mozel Tav! Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First     The Town Hall Forum Index -> Impolite Company All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 Page 4 of 4 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group