BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

You seem to be so much more focused on telling everyone what Catholics do wrong than what your faith does right. Seems kind of telling me. I am filled with the love of my faith while you seem to be filled with despising another. It feels like you are dangerously close to making statements quoted in the OP that got this thread kicked off.

You seem to have a lot of questions about why Catholics believe what they do. It isn't arbitrary. For the example of infant baptism you can find the answer here as it appears you are misconceived about the practice:

Infant baptism

Here is another one regarding the vestments you showed by graphic depiction:

Vestments

You can disagree with these explanations and others, but do so with theological reasoning. Provide some scriptural counterpoints. However, this discussion should probably be moved to the religion board. Though I do think that it does, to a great degree, fall under the umbrella of the freedom of religion topic of the OP.

---

What our faith does right, imo, is make every effort to follow scripture as closely as possible and not add onto it. I feel like the Catholic church has taken a lot of liberties here. I know I am not alone.

I also don't know why the Catholic faith does not follow the baptism blueprint outlined in the Bible. Jesus was literally dunked/immersed under the water. So were his followers. To everyone alive back then, "Baptizo" meant to fully immerse...not to trickle water. One of my protestant buddies once told me it was because some Catholic leader centuries ago fell gravely ill and they could not properly baptize him so they ran water over his head, later declaring that this was sufficient. Sounds like lore to me, but I am curious as to how some council centuries later had authority to change something that is so clearly laid out in the Bible.

I also do not believe there is biblical basis to elevate ANY man between us and Christ...even if symbolically. The catholic church has taken an extraordinary amount of liberties in adding onto the Bible over the centuries imo.

---

Also, this is from the Didache; in 70 AD (does this count as early church)?

"Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

---

Sounds unbiblical...like a random first century man just making things up.

---

Again, this is from AD 70, so it would likely be considered unbiblical, given that it predates the Bible by 330 years. Is this the first you've heard of the Didache?

---

I have heard of the Didache but do not believe it to be divinely inspired or legitimate part of the Bible. I only follow the word of God, no matter when it was all aggregated and assembled. I really don't care what non-apostles were saying in the interim. I'll put more trust in the blueprint offered by Jesus and John the Baptist.

---

Where does the word of God come from? Who decides what is the word of God and not the word of God?

I don't disagree with anything you said in your post, but that is not what I am referring to in regards to this thread but specifically the ongoing argument between posters.

Here is more on Scripture and Tradition. If you disagree with the arguments given, I would like to know what they are and why. I am always interested in hearing Protestant arguments because it helps me understand my own faith. Despite our differences we are brothers after all and brothers should not treat each other with disdain.

Quote:

---

Despite our differences we are brothers after all and brothers should not treat each other with disdain.

---

Gotta pop in for a quick second here. According to the Catholic churches teachings, we, in fact, are not brothers and Protestants are bound for hell.

I cannot remember the exact name of the doctrine, please excuse, but the other Catholic authoritarian around here...ummm....an EastTX username, linked the doctrine. Basically, we as Protestants, know the truth of the Church but don't follow it, so buh-bye.

Having said that, it would be nice if we could all come together and get along. Sadly, thousands of Catholics and Protestants have slaughtered each other over the centuries due to their differences in salvation beliefs. My gut tells me Christ is not exactly happy about that.

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

Despite our differences we are brothers after all and brothers should not treat each other with disdain.

---

Gotta pop in for a quick second here. According to the Catholic churches teachings, we, in fact, are not brothers and Protestants are bound for hell.

I cannot remember the exact name of the doctrine, please excuse, but the other Catholic authoritarian around here...ummm....an EastTX username, linked the doctrine. Basically, we as Protestants, know the truth of the Church but don't follow it, so buh-bye.

Having said that, it would be nice if we could all come together and get along. Sadly, thousands of Catholics and Protestants have slaughtered each other over the centuries due to their differences in salvation beliefs. My gut tells me Christ is not exactly happy about that.

---

If I had a brother that committed crimes and I knew he was destined for jail, that does not mean he is not my brother any more and it does not mean that I would stop loving him. So, I kind of disagree with your characterization in the first paragraph.

From the Protestant perspective Catholics are going to hell because our religion is false too does it not? It is a two-way street. This is the reason why I believe very firmly in the need for respect in these age-old arguments.

ETA: So much energy is wasted in the argument between Catholics and Protestants when there is a TRUE enemy out there doing real damage. The focus should be there. We share 95% of the same beliefs yet the devil takes that 5% and has turned it into a centuries long distraction.

We should understand each other's beliefs much more deeply. Let people decide what they are based on the strength of the doctrines, but I think there is fear that one side or the other will convert their membership. But shouldn't that be the case?

Dies Irae and American Hardwood, thank you for both of yall's contributions and defense of our Faith here. As a fellow Catholic, I was going to jump in here, but you are already responding with great content and info that I won't muddy the waters further.

But in response to CDUB98 regarding the supposed Catholic believe that Protestants don't go to heaven--that is not accurate. If some of your Catholic acquaintances told you that, they are misrepresenting the Church's stance on it. Both me and my Catholic wife grew up our early childhood with mixed faith marriages. Both our dads were Methodist, then later converted to Catholicism. So I do have some first-hand experience on this. Here's a good quick explanation of the Church's stance, with excerpts from the catechism itself.

http://wcucatholic.org/ask-deacon-do-protestants-go-to-heaven/

Dies Irae said:

---

One day every knee shall bend to Christ and every tongue proclaim him King of the World.

---

Amen!. Jesus Christ is either Lord and Savior in this life, or Prosecutor and Judge in the eternal age to come.

sethags said:

---

Dies Irae and American Hardwood, thank you for both of yall's contributions and defense of our Faith here. As a fellow Catholic, I was going to jump in here, but you are already responding with great content and info that I won't muddy the waters further.

But in response to CDUB98 regarding the supposed Catholic believe that Protestants don't go to heaven--that is not accurate. If some of your Catholic acquaintances told you that, they are misrepresenting the Church's stance on it. Both me and my Catholic wife grew up our early childhood with mixed faith marriages. Both our dads were Methodist, then later converted to Catholicism. So I do have some first-hand experience on this. Here's a good quick explanation of the Church's stance, with excerpts from the catechism itself.

http://wcucatholic.org/ask-deacon-do-protestants-go-to-heaven/

---

Yeah, numerous Catholic "friends" told me I was going to hell growing up. Didn't realize how mean...or laughably ironic...that was at the time. I won't condemn anyone to a fate like hell (unlike some others on here), but I would not want to be this current marxist POS Pope.

The poster whose name I referenced used the Latin phrase as his link, but the common phrase is "outside the church there is no salvation."

sethags said:

---

Dies Irae and American Hardwood, thank you for both of yall's contributions and defense of our Faith here. As a fellow Catholic, I was going to jump in here, but you are already responding with great content and info that I won't muddy the waters further.

But in response to CDUB98 regarding the supposed Catholic believe that Protestants don't go to heaven--that is not accurate. If some of your Catholic acquaintances told you that, they are misrepresenting the Church's stance on it. Both me and my Catholic wife grew up our early childhood with mixed faith marriages. Both our dads were Methodist, then later converted to Catholicism. So I do have some first-hand experience on this. Here's a good quick explanation of the Church's stance, with excerpts from the catechism itself.

http://wcucatholic.org/ask-deacon-do-protestants-go-to-heaven/

---

Thanks for that. I probably should have delved into that for my own sake because I did not know that level of detail about the subject. On my post I was focused on the seeming hypocrisy of the accusation more so than the accuracy of the statement.

Quote:

---

I won't condemn anyone to a fate like hell (unlike some others on here), but I would not want to be this current marxist POS Pope.

---

Can you explain this statement a bit? I don't quite get what you are saying. Not sure what the marxist Pope has to do with one person condemning another person to hell (which they cannot do BTW).

Also, Protestants have never engaged in saying someone else is going to hell? You seem to throw a lot of stones in that glass house of yours.

I didn't respond to your "going to hell" question before.

I can only speak to the church I was raised in, but it was explicitly taught, and often, that we cannot judge someone else's soul.

It's stuck with me so much, that even though I badly want to, I have a hard time responding to the crazed groomer articles that the person can go to hell. I'm sure I have but try not to. Shouldn't wish that on anyone as, per scripture, we all deserve.....but boy it feels like some deserve it more.

Sorry for the sidetrack along with my explanation.

American Hardwood said:

---

Here is more on Scripture and Tradition. If you disagree with the arguments given, I would like to know what they are and why. I am always interested in hearing Protestant arguments because it helps me understand my own faith. Despite our differences we are brothers after all and brothers should not treat each other with disdain.

---

This is a good post. I think that explains some of our differences, that being said, every protestant Church or study group I have been involved in realizes the importance of solid biblical leaders/scholars within the flock to offer their guidance and insight, not completely unlike the Catholic church. I think where our main difference lies, is in the validity of non-biblical writings as being "holy" or "divinely inspired". Supplemental theological literature is common, but it's just meant to help better our understanding/strengthen our faith.

I DO believe the Bible is fully sufficient. That being said, I think it is extremely important to have devoted and well learned teachers to help dissect and communicate it, because a book that has been translated numerous times over thousands of years is not always going to be extremely easy to follow. You can read the Beatitudes for instance and it's great, but when you study with someone who has devoted countless hours to understanding it, it takes on a much deeper meaning.

One other difference while it's on my mind, is that the Lord's Prayer is not seen as a specific prayer to be recited at many protestant churches, but as a model prayer...some of us believe that in Matthew 6, Jesus was teaching people how to pray and giving them the blueprint. Nothing at all wrong with saying it in those words, it's a great prayer and I recite it from time to time, but I would hope most people expand further than that in their daily prayers. Many of us just believe this was Jesus actually teaching the first Christians how to pray and prioritize/order their prayer. Their human nature likely would have been to focus on just reciting a wish list of wants/needs, rather than giving praise to the almighty first and asking for the basics and focusing on forgiveness.

CDUB98 said:

---

I didn't respond to your "going to hell" question before.

I can only speak to the church I was raised in, but it was explicitly taught, and often, that we cannot judge someone else's soul.

It's stuck with me so much, that even though I badly want to, I have a hard time responding to the crazed groomer articles that the person can go to hell. I'm sure I have but try not to. Shouldn't wish that on anyone as, per scripture, we all deserve.....but boy it feels like some deserve it more.

Sorry for the sidetrack along with my explanation.

---

This is my take too. I find myself almost instinctively starting to wish hell on those crazy groomer types (and other evil people) at times and have to stop myself. To "love your enemy" is to pray for them...knowing that if they knew Christ like you did, they would not be that way. And we should want that for them. That's how I was taught at least.

That's increasingly hard to do for me.

American Hardwood said:

---

Quote:

---

I won't condemn anyone to a fate like hell (unlike some others on here), but I would not want to be this current marxist POS Pope.

---

Can you explain this statement a bit? I don't quite get what you are saying. Not sure what the marxist Pope has to do with one person condemning another person to hell (which they cannot do BTW).

Also, Protestants have never engaged in saying someone else is going to hell? You seem to throw a lot of stones in that glass house of yours.

---

I have said all types of awful things on this site (some on this thread), but I don't believe in condemning someone to hell, or wishing that on them. Even though I sometimes get the urge too.

My remarks on the Pope, however, are that, imo, he is playing with fire. I believe there is biblical basis for holding religious leaders to much harsher standards, given the power and influence they have over the flock. If I was a leader in the Catholic or Protestant faith, I would be extremely careful to make sure i do not depart from the teachings at all or concern myself with some of the things this current Pope has concerned himself with.

CDUB98, yes those are technically the literal words it says. But if you read the explanation in that link I sent, basically it further clarifies that by the term "Church" it is referring Christ himself. Meaning outside of Jesus, whose body is the holy Church, there is no salvation.

TLDR summary at the end of the article:

"We began by stating yes, a Protestant can be saved without entering the Catholic Church. Now let's summarize how that would happen.

• Christ has linked salvation to faith and baptism, both of which are present in Protestant communities."

CDUB98 said:

---

The poster whose name I referenced used the Latin phrase as his link, but the common phrase is "outside the church there is no salvation."

---

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

I did read it.

I am merely trying to say that there are Catholics who do not agree, and at least one posts here, though, I have not seen him in a while, so he may be banned.

CDUB98 said:

---

I did read it.

I am merely trying to say that there are Catholics who do not agree, and at least one posts here, though, I have not seen him in a while, so he may be banned.

---

He's practicing extra hard for our upcoming boxing match. He has never faced anyone who had to battle groups of cholos growing up.

It's not Dies. I can't remember the guy's name.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

I did read it.

I am merely trying to say that there are Catholics who do not agree, and at least one posts here, though, I have not seen him in a while, so he may be banned.

---

He's practicing extra hard for our upcoming boxing match. He has never faced anyone who had to battle groups of cholos growing up.

---

Bro; Katy Boxing club is off Greenhouse and West Little York I'm the only white dude in there.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Here is more on Scripture and Tradition. If you disagree with the arguments given, I would like to know what they are and why. I am always interested in hearing Protestant arguments because it helps me understand my own faith. Despite our differences we are brothers after all and brothers should not treat each other with disdain.

---

This is a good post. I think that explains some of our differences, that being said, every protestant Church or study group I have been involved in realizes the importance of solid biblical leaders/scholars within the flock to offer their guidance and insight, not completely unlike the Catholic church. I think where our main difference lies, is in the validity of non-biblical writings as being "holy" or "divinely inspired". Supplemental theological literature is common, but it's just meant to help better our understanding/strengthen our faith. I can understand this position regarding non-Biblical writing/teaching. Believe me that the Church does too. Where do you think all those early heresies came from? Non-biblical 'theology' must be very carefully scrutinized and studied. The Catholic Church is very vigilant about this though it may not seem that way to someone such as yourself because Catholicism believes that Tradition (true Christian beliefs not found in the Bible explicitly) does exist and that Scripture allows for it to exist.

I DO believe the Bible is fully sufficient. That being said, I think it is extremely important to have devoted and well learned teachers to help dissect and communicate it, because a book that has been translated numerous times over thousands of years is not always going to be extremely easy to follow. You can read the Beatitudes for instance and it's great, but when you study with someone who has devoted countless hours to understanding it, it takes on a much deeper meaning. You say that the Bible is sufficient but also say that additional writings and teachings are good to help us understand the scripture. How is this different from Catholic Tradition (oral or otherwise documented) that does the same other than perhaps the time frame of its development? It seems to me that your issue is not so much that there are things outside of the Bible that help us understand the faith as much as it is with Catholic Church essentially appointing itself as the authority of doctrine. (This is a simplified statement for the sake of discussion, Christ appoints the authority by Catholic belief). Correct me if my characterization is wrong.

It stands to reason that if you have issues with the Catholic order of things, you are going to have an issue with their proclamation of doctrine outside the strict bounds of scripture. But as I said before, aren't you doing the same thing by accepting explanatory interpretations by the theological teacher of your choice in your Protestant faith? Everything you need is in the Bible, but the Bible does not have everything you need to fully understand the Bible within its covers. For that we need a little help and that help may not always look like you think it should in this time and place.

For example, you may be critical of the Church's adornments or the appearance of vestments or the adherence to rituals and such, but for most of church history, great numbers of people did not read or write. These things were used as a means of teaching something about the faith. The art in architecture, the clothing, the sacraments were a part of teaching. You might argue that the apostles didn't need these to teach and that would be true, but then whatever books or videos you might see in your bible studies aren't strictly needed either are they? Yet you would agree that they help.

One other difference while it's on my mind, is that the Lord's Prayer is not seen as a specific prayer to be recited at many protestant churches, but as a model prayer...some of us believe that in Matthew 6, Jesus was teaching people how to pray and giving them the blueprint. Nothing at all wrong with saying it in those words, it's a great prayer and I recite it from time to time, but I would hope most people expand further than that in their daily prayers. Many of us just believe this was Jesus actually teaching the first Christians how to pray and prioritize/order their prayer. Their human nature likely would have been to focus on just reciting a wish list of wants/needs, rather than giving praise to the almighty first and asking for the basics and focusing on forgiveness.

I'm not sure what your understanding of Catholics regard for the Lord's Prayer is, but I don't think anything you said is inconsistent with Catholicism. We have tons of prayers outside of the Lord's Prayer. If anything, they are way too many for my feeble mind to remember, and that's just for the ones you can find in use today. There must be tens of thousands of prayers written and lost in the time of the Church.

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Quote:

---

I won't condemn anyone to a fate like hell (unlike some others on here), but I would not want to be this current marxist POS Pope.

---

Can you explain this statement a bit? I don't quite get what you are saying. Not sure what the marxist Pope has to do with one person condemning another person to hell (which they cannot do BTW).

Also, Protestants have never engaged in saying someone else is going to hell? You seem to throw a lot of stones in that glass house of yours.

---

I have said all types of awful things on this site (some on this thread), but I don't believe in condemning someone to hell, or wishing that on them. Even though I sometimes get the urge too.

My remarks on the Pope, however, are that, imo, he is playing with fire. I believe there is biblical basis for holding religious leaders to much harsher standards, given the power and influence they have over the flock. If I was a leader in the Catholic or Protestant faith, I would be extremely careful to make sure i do not depart from the teachings at all or concern myself with some of the things this current Pope has concerned himself with.

---

Your concern for the Pope is shared by a lot of Catholics too. The Pope is still just a man and can err like any man. You would hope that someone who achieves that position would not been prone to it, but there are no guarantees. Fortunately, we have the magisterium to regard dogmas.

John 6 regarding the eating of the flesh of Christ is a bit of a sticky wicket though if you don't believe in the Eucharist. But that is a long-standing debate that isn't going to solved here so I don't really intend to strike up that debate. Nor am I suggesting that disbelief in the Eucharist is condemning.

What I will say regarding condemnation is that despite all of the scriptural citations and religious doctrine, God still is the final judge of who he accepts into Heaven. I take that to mean that even if you are not Christian, there is a chance by some possible unknown criteria, I just don't like your chances.

And in my own personal opinion, baby murderers need not apply.

American Hardwood said:

---

Quote:

---

I won't condemn anyone to a fate like hell (unlike some others on here), but I would not want to be this current marxist POS Pope.

---

Can you explain this statement a bit? I don't quite get what you are saying. Not sure what the marxist Pope has to do with one person condemning another person to hell (which they cannot do BTW).

Also, Protestants have never engaged in saying someone else is going to hell? You seem to throw a lot of stones in that glass house of yours.

---

I'm a Baptist and vehemently disagree with the Catholic Church on many issues, but no I have never once said this about Catholics or anyone who believes in the Trinity and has faith that Jesus died for their sins. I am told this daily by Catholics though both here, Twitter, and elsewhere.

Edit - Saying someone is going to hell in this kind of situation is basically debating in bad faith and it does nothing but rile people up. Even throwing out my reasoning above, I would never do it for this reason alone. It accomplishes nothing.

Quote:

---

The Pope is still just a man and can err like any man.

---

I said this once to a Catholic chick I, briefly, dated in high school. The look she gave me caused my life to flash before my eyes. LOL Of course, it was John Paul II at the time, so not anywhere near our current Marxist pope.

Of course, her love of the Pope and the Church didn't keep her from screwing about anything that moved....except me, which frankly, I'm ok with.

In a He.. freezes over turn, Ihlan Omar castigated the Jewish GOP congressman for trying to cancel Jesus.

UTExan said:

---

In a He.. freezes over turn, Ihlan Omar castigated the Jewish GOP congressman for trying to cancel Jesus.

---

If this is where you're at, you've got a lot of thread to catch up on.

Ohio Right to Life dismissed communications director Elizabeth Marbach after Ohio Republican Congressman Max Miller, whose wife sits on the entity’s board, rebuked her for sharing the gospel on social media.https://t.co/XdsQkri444

— The Sentinel (@RepubSentinel) August 17, 2023

Should have smeared lambs blood over her door, maybe the angry Jewish lobby would have passed over

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Pope is still just a man and can err like any man.

---

I said this once to a Catholic chick I, briefly, dated in high school. The look she gave me caused my life to flash before my eyes. LOL Of course, it was John Paul II at the time, so not anywhere near our current Marxist pope.

Of course, her love of the Pope and the Church didn't keep her from screwing about anything that moved....except me, which frankly, I'm ok with.

---

Many catholics apparently dont recognize the fact that the pope is in fact a man (not christ in human form) and is indeed fallible and does sin (In other words he is not a mouthpiece to speak with God for every person).

Christ is the only one who can be a mediator for us as individuals once we obey the gospel.

Sorry to disappoint the many catholics on here. It is not my intention but truth is truth.

Dies Irae said:

---

Ohio Right to Life dismissed communications director Elizabeth Marbach after Ohio Republican Congressman Max Miller, whose wife sits on the entity’s board, rebuked her for sharing the gospel on social media.https://t.co/XdsQkri444

— The Sentinel (@RepubSentinel) August 17, 2023

Should have smeared lambs blood over her door, maybe the angry Jewish lobby would have passed over

---

More details

https://x.com/aristos_revenge/status/1692337308245078407?s=46&t=462MEM3sSqz3gVJJl-ts1w

Old_Ag_91 said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Pope is still just a man and can err like any man.

---

I said this once to a Catholic chick I, briefly, dated in high school. The look she gave me caused my life to flash before my eyes. LOL Of course, it was John Paul II at the time, so not anywhere near our current Marxist pope.

Of course, her love of the Pope and the Church didn't keep her from screwing about anything that moved....except me, which frankly, I'm ok with.

---

Many catholics apparently dont recognize the fact that the pope is in fact a man (not christ in human form) and is indeed fallible and does sin (In other words he is not a mouthpiece to speak with God for every person).

Christ is the only one who can be a mediator for us as individuals once we obey the gospel.

Sorry to disappoint the many catholics on here. It is not my intention but truth is truth.

---

I don't think you have any idea what Catholics actually believe.

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ohio Right to Life dismissed communications director Elizabeth Marbach after Ohio Republican Congressman Max Miller, whose wife sits on the entity’s board, rebuked her for sharing the gospel on social media.https://t.co/XdsQkri444

— The Sentinel (@RepubSentinel) August 17, 2023

Should have smeared lambs blood over her door, maybe the angry Jewish lobby would have passed over

---

More details

ATTENTION

The church lady who had a Jewish GOP congressman demand she delete a post affirming her faith, @LizzieMarbach, has been fired from @ohiolife because Max Miller's wife, Emily Moreno Miller, is on its board. Her father is running for OH senate.https://t.co/sjmRjHESgX

— 🏛 Aristophanes 🏛 (@Aristos_Revenge) August 18, 2023

---

Let me get this straight. @LizzieMarbach makes a statement on social media that is completely fundamental to the Christian faith.

Sitting congressman @MaxMillerOH rebukes her, calling her a bigot and demanding she delete it while his wife sits on the board of her employer…… pic.twitter.com/8nh2VbINkS

— Ginna Cross (@GinnaCross) August 18, 2023

You see it's all a conspiracy though, the Jews are the most oppressed minority in the world and have no power at all.

Absolutely amazing, what a total joke.

I knew that congressman was completely insincere. There is no question he apologized while grinding his teeth in anger.

thanks, Trump.

Emily Moreno Miller is also the daughter of businessman Bernie Moreno. He's running for Senate in OH and said reparations should be on the table.