Roman Catholic Atrocities

[James Rondon]

Read the previous posts. We were talking about doctrines and practices which go against the Scriptures.

[Imabear]

THE INQUISITION: A Study in Absolute Catholic Power
Arthur Maricle, Ph.D.

"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration." {Revelation 17:6}

Those who classify themselves as Christians can be divided into 2 broad groups: those who have chosen to allow the Bible to be their final authority and those who have chosen to allow men to be their final authority. For sake of simplicity, I shall refer to the first group as "Bible believing Christians."  The latter group has always been best represented by Roman Catholicism, by far its largest, most powerful, and most influential component.  The Roman Catholic hierarchy has always boldly stated that it is not dependent upon Scripture alone, but also accepts tradition as another pillar of truth -- and where a conflict exists, tradition receives the greater acceptance. Being its own arbiter of what is to be accepted as truth, it accepts no authority as being higher than itself.  This explains why the Catholic belief system has been constantly evolving over the centuries.

Not all non-Roman Catholic Christians are Bible believing.  There are many Protestant sects (maybe even most) that have wandered far away from conservative scriptural teachings.  Any article that divides Christians into two broad groups and implies RCC as non-Bible believing and other Christians as Bible believing is prejudicial.
One other thing the article states is that the RCC doctrine is in a constant state if evolution.
Most Protestant groups are in a constant state of evolution too.  Look how much even the CoC has changed over the past 50-60 years.  All the different denominations are divisions originated with man's interpretations of scripture and traditions.  Just look at the issues of IM or baptism for starters.  Let's take an honset look at ourselves before we throw stones.

[Charles Sloan]

w8ing4daybreak,

As I said here on the first page, I posted this article for equal informational purposes only. There was no intention of throwing stones. I was responding to the topic posted by a catholic entitled Protestant Atrocities.

[Imabear]

As W_S stated in that forum:

Did you know that if two Chinese people get married, their children will not be English?

Yep....two Wong's don't make a Wright.

Charles, The Catholic Church has commited atrocities.  They also have a few doctrines... like the one about the pope being infallible that are just plain wrong in my opinion.  We as non-Catholics don't have the best history either.  When It comes to judgement day, I'm sure we will learn of faults within ourselves we never were aware of.  I do think that even though they have some incorrect teachings we need to explain to them how we see things differently in a way that shows love and respect.

I have a good friend who is Catholic.  I have gotten a lot further with her in teaching her what I believe, by being a friend to her, by offering to pray for her when she is going through a rough time than by attacking her doctrines.   
A few years ago we were working together and for weeks everyone know that something was wrong with "Lisa", but Lisa wasn't talking.  One night, out of the blue, she just unloaded everything that was bothering her... on me.  I was there for her, I could pray for her.  She was open in reading some literature written by a Protestant author.  I was able to meet her in her time of need.  If I had been throwing stones at her for her false doctrines, I doubt I would have ever had that opportunity.   

[Charles Sloan]

w8ing4daybreak,

I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't throwing stones at anyone. If you want to continue asserting that exposing the errors of roman catholic doctrine (or any other false doctrine for that matter) is throwing stones at people thats fine, just remember that you are doing the exact same thing you accuse others of.

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

[da525382]

Unfortunately, the call to "tradition" is the ultimate convenience, because "tradition" is self-defined, and the history it builds upon becomes laundered through the centuries.  No one's "tradition" is a perfect rendering if history, and much of it, and in my opinion, especially in the catholic tradition, was purposefully repressed and silenced.  Even Luther would have never been a name in catholic history absent his ability to engender the popular following he had.  By that time, it was pretty well accepted that it was to late to get rid of him, to make him simply disappear.

[Harold]

Weren't people on the other thread calling people hypocrite, and yet here we are.

It is beyond sad. Glad to see others pointing out the same.

FTL

[Imabear]

w8ing4daybreak,

I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't throwing stones at anyone. If you want to continue asserting that exposing the errors of roman catholic doctrine (or any other false doctrine for that matter) is throwing stones at people thats fine, just remember that you are doing the exact same thing you accuse others of.

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

I didn't say you couldn't point out the errors of their ways.   I understand your point, but at the same time, people are being driven away from the site.  (And no, I don't think you're the primary cause of it.)  We fail to be able make an impact on people if they aren't here anymore.   
I looked up those verses you quoted in different versions.  I understand you are a KJV kind of guy, but I wanted to see how the word longsuffering, was interpreted in other translations.  I guess I should go back to the Greek, but I haven't learned Greek yet. :)
NCV

Tell them when they are wrong. Encourage them with great patience and careful teaching,

I like that.  There are a few translations that translate it with similar terms.  Encouragement and patience are a key part of delivering the message. 
Peeps, including me, don't like to be told we are wrong.  It helps to deliver the message in a kind, gentle, loving sort of way.  If I could have done a better job of delivering this message to you, what could I have done differently?  When we feel we are being accused, we often get defensive and don't hear the message. 
I'm outta time.
I gotta go. 
God Bless.

[broach972]

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

That is quite a whopper of an assumption.  Charles, your arrogance is quite overwhelming at times.  As a Catholic, I don't believe the Church is in error or teaches false doctrine.  I think this is what is getting old.  I have embraced the faith willingly after ten years of study.  I have tried to explain what we believe in.  I know some of it is quite deep and beyond most of your understanding.  For me, it is quite simple.  The teachings and doctrines of the Church have stood for more than 2000 years.

So, I don't need any rebuking or reproofing, thank you very much.  I am very much secure in what I believe in and what the Church teaches.  Not only do I know the truth, I have embraced it fully.

I think that I am perhaps the only remaining Catholic on this forum.  While the desire to leave is tempting, I am not sure what I am going to do.

God bless

[Circuitridingpreacher]

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

That is quite a whopper of an assumption.  Charles, your arrogance is quite overwhelming at times.  As a Catholic, I don't believe the Church is in error or teaches false doctrine.  I think this is what is getting old.  I have embraced the faith willingly after ten years of study.  I have tried to explain what we believe in.  I know some of it is quite deep and beyond most of your understanding.  For me, it is quite simple.  The teachings and doctrines of the Church have stood for more than 2000 years.

So, I don't need any rebuking or reproofing, thank you very much.  I am very much secure in what I believe in and what the Church teaches.  Not only do I know the truth, I have embraced it fully.

I think that I am perhaps the only remaining Catholic on this forum.  While the desire to leave is tempting, I am not sure what I am going to do.

God bless

Just curious Broach, since the very mention of Roman Catholicism here causes so much trouble, why do you think anyone here wants to hear anything about your church?

CRP

[James Rondon]

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

That is quite a whopper of an assumption.  Charles, your arrogance is quite overwhelming at times.  As a Catholic, I don't believe the Church is in error or teaches false doctrine.

Most, if not all who are in error believe that they are not. For instance, what Jehovah's Witness believes that their church teaches false doctrine? What Mormon believes that their church teaches false doctrine? The only way to demonstrate whether a church (or individual) is teaching the truth, or error, is to point to the Scriptures. In order to avoid having their errors exposed, however, many who teach false doctrine will point away from the Scriptures.

I think this is what is getting old.  I have embraced the faith willingly after ten years of study.

And? How many Jehovah's Witnesses are a part of that organization and can make the same, if not greater claims? How many Mormons? The question is not always whether or not one has studied, but what, how, and why has one been studying. 

I have tried to explain what we believe in.  I know some of it is quite deep and beyond most of your understanding.

Perhaps many of the doctrines and practices of the Roman Catholic church are beyond the understanding of many, because they are unbiblical, erroneous, and therefore, unable to truly be understood?

The teachings and doctrines of the Church have stood for more than 2000 years.

The teachings and doctrines (same thing, by the way) of the Roman Catholic church have changed a number of times, and will continue to change and adapt, because they are willed by the ever-changing dictates of men, and not by the unchanging word of God.

So, I don't need any rebuking or reproofing, thank you very much.

Because one does not see the need, does not mean that the need does not exist. In fact, when it comes to rebuke and reproof, which recipient ever believes that he or she is in need? 

I am very much secure in what I believe in and what the Church teaches.

Security does not equal truth. The Scriptures tell us to "examine ourselves", and to "prove all things".

I think that I am perhaps the only remaining Catholic on this forum.  While the desire to leave is tempting, I am not sure what I am going to do.

You may be the only remaining Roman Catholic.

[WileyClarkson]

 ON

      

Catholic wrong------Protestant right-------Catholic right-------Protestant wrong-------
It's enough to make one !!

Come on guys! 

You Catholics are wrong on alot of issues!

You Protestants are ALSO wrong on alot of issues!

And so are YOU who are LDS or JW or any other sect/cult.

No one has a lock on what is perfect from Scripture.  if you think you do, then I suspect before it is over God will show you how wrong you are for thinking you are the perfect answer to Biblical understanding!

The Catholics are saying one has to have a Pope to explain certain things.  Give me a break!!!!!  I sure don't need one man telling me how to believe BUT If that is what a person who is a Catholic wants, that's fine with me!!!  They believe in Jesus Christ just like I do!

The Protestants want Solo Scriptura and to think for themselves byletting Scripture be the only source for their understanding (and I am a part of that crowd!) yet they (we) fail to recognize that many of the very things we believe from SS are based on human translation of ancient languages that we just can't correctly translate because we just don't know the real translation/application for some words and they also can't seem tor recognize that humans (scribes and copiests) have modified some Scriptures for their own purpose over the centuries.  IOW, it is not SS at any time unles you have the original letters and have a total understanding of the ancient Greek that no Greek Scholar I know claims to possess!  A good example of this is the discussion of gender equality, especially since the scriptures dealing with gender in 1 Cor and 1 Tim are some of the most debated and mistranslated scripture in the NT, not to mention that there is considerable debate about what has been added to or  taken out of these scriptures to begin with!

About all I'm seeing here is THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK FROM BOTH SIDES.  That's not discussion--that's finger pointing and labeling of Christians on both sides and that is just not what we are about on this forum.

Now that's my opinion on this discussion (if you can call it a discussion!).  I hope it become more productive because so far it has not been, IMO!

Off   

[Bonnie]

What is going to happen when and if the debates stop?  Is anyone on either side gonna change their beliefs and their place of worship?

I hate false doctrine with a passion. I will fight against it until my dying day. But can we change the doctrine of the entire Catholic church?  Does anybody honestly believe we can?  I want to do my share in defeating the enemies of Christianity.  You who know me know that.

This is different than trying to help one or two people see the error in their doctrine.

[Charles Sloan]

So since no ones got a lock on what is right about Scripture, and since God will show us how wrong we all are lets just shut down the message boards and stop discussing controversial topics like these. Lets just all be content to tolerate or even embrace what we consider false teachings in the name of being "Christlike" and "loving" so as to not upset the masses. I'm sure Jesus, Paul and the other Apostles could have learned alot from the members here, they only would have tried better to just get along with the Pharisees and Sadducee's.

All those wasted years...

[James Rondon]

Such is neither "Christlike", nor is it "loving".

[Charles Sloan]

Such is neither "Christlike", nor is it "loving".

The only times I see these word used lately is to condemn someone.

[Bonnie]

So since no ones got a lock on what is right about Scripture, and since God will show us how wrong we all are lets just shut down the message boards and stop discussing controversial topics like these. Lets just all be content to tolerate or even embrace what we consider false teachings in the name of being "Christlike" and "loving" so as to not upset the masses. I'm sure Jesus, Paul and the other Apostles could have learned alot from the members here, they only would have tried better to just get along with the Pharisees and Sadducee's.

All those wasted years...

LOL  Could be the first time I've ever been accused of wanting to run.  

[Bonnie]

Such is neither "Christlike", nor is it "loving".

The only times I see these word used lately is to condemn someone.

Amen to that! 

[broach972]

Wiley,
I appreciate your comments.  However, when one looks at the posts made by Catholics on this forum--we are doing one of two things:  constantly defending what the Church teaches or explaining them in an attempt to remove any misconceptions.  Even when we explain them, members of this forum continue to engage in misinformation and deception.

Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

I am all for civilized and productive discussion.  However, there are those on this forum that are determined to insult, mock, and disgrace the very faith I belong to.

Unfortunately, many have decided to leave.  This is what makes me sad.

[kensington]

I'm glad that you were able to have that opportunity with your friend. But sometimes you need to do as Paul says: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." And we see why in the next verse: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;". So there is a time and place for exposing false teachings by using  reproof, rebuke, and sound doctrine to expose the error of those who reject the truth.

That is quite a whopper of an assumption.  Charles, your arrogance is quite overwhelming at times.  As a Catholic, I don't believe the Church is in error or teaches false doctrine.  I think this is what is getting old.  I have embraced the faith willingly after ten years of study.  I have tried to explain what we believe in.  I know some of it is quite deep and beyond most of your understanding.  For me, it is quite simple.  The teachings and doctrines of the Church have stood for more than 2000 years.

So, I don't need any rebuking or reproofing, thank you very much.  I am very much secure in what I believe in and what the Church teaches.  Not only do I know the truth, I have embraced it fully.

I think that I am perhaps the only remaining Catholic on this forum.  While the desire to leave is tempting, I am not sure what I am going to do.

God bless

Then you are just a young pup.... My fil has been a faithful Catholic for 71 years, my sil for 44, and my husband was one for 21 years before He left for the true church... and became a Born again Protestant.

I think you should give it more study before you deem yourself most knowledgable.  10 years isn't a thing. I'm learning more and more that my husband who lived it, and went to the schools and classes all those years really did know what he was doing when he denounced it as false and walked away.  He studied it for 21 years, that is long enough to make a sound judgement, even by your standards. As you say, you have been studying only 10 years.

[kensington]

Broach... did you not state this...

"The fact is your husband has compromised his beliefs.  He has sacrificed a foundation of marble (Catholicism) for plastic - Legos (Trinitarian Protestantism).  Will it lead to salvation - hopefully."

and this....


Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

But, isn't saying my husband compromised his beliefs when he left Catholocism and was saved, and implying he needs salvation "Will it lead to salvation-hopefully"  calling him unsaved... which is non-Christian?

You have said what you deny you said. An unsaved person is a non Christian, and you said he needed salvatioin. Thus you called this protestant man, non Christian.  If he needed to be lead to salvation, that would be saying he is unsaved, or non-Christian.

Unless, you'd like to recant. 

[Bonnie]

He is then saying that only Catholics go to heaven.?

[constantine]

Broach... did you not state this...

"The fact is your husband has compromised his beliefs.  He has sacrificed a foundation of marble (Catholicism) for plastic - Legos (Trinitarian Protestantism).  Will it lead to salvation - hopefully."

and this....


Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

But, isn't saying my husband compromised his beliefs when he left Catholocism and was saved, and implying he needs salvation "Will it lead to salvation-hopefully"  calling him unsaved... which is non-Christian?

You have said what you deny you said. An unsaved person is a non Christian, and you said he needed salvatioin. Thus you called this protestant man, non Christian.  If he needed to be lead to salvation, that would be saying he is unsaved, or non-Christian.

Unless, you'd like to recant. 

This thread sure seems hostile.  Why are you accusing Broach of saying something someone else said?  The name of the person who posted it is right by the post - seems hard to believe you could miss it.   Bearing false witness is a violation of the 9th commandment......

Unless, you'd like to recant.

[constantine]

He is then saying that only Catholics go to heaven.?

"Will he go to Heaven, hopefully" does not mean "only Catholics go to heaven"

It suggests that salvation is based on a sanctifying relationship with Christ that lasts a life time, not a one time formula.

[broach972]

Broach... did you not state this...

"The fact is your husband has compromised his beliefs.  He has sacrificed a foundation of marble (Catholicism) for plastic - Legos (Trinitarian Protestantism).  Will it lead to salvation - hopefully."

and this....


Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

But, isn't saying my husband compromised his beliefs when he left Catholocism and was saved, and implying he needs salvation "Will it lead to salvation-hopefully"  calling him unsaved... which is non-Christian?

You have said what you deny you said. An unsaved person is a non Christian, and you said he needed salvatioin. Thus you called this protestant man, non Christian.  If he needed to be lead to salvation, that would be saying he is unsaved, or non-Christian.

Unless, you'd like to recant. 

I did not make the first statement.  If memory serves me correctly, that was CC.  The second one belongs to me.

[broach972]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

By the way, you are new.  Welcome.

[Circuitridingpreacher]

Broach... did you not state this...

"The fact is your husband has compromised his beliefs.  He has sacrificed a foundation of marble (Catholicism) for plastic - Legos (Trinitarian Protestantism).  Will it lead to salvation - hopefully."

and this....


Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

But, isn't saying my husband compromised his beliefs when he left Catholocism and was saved, and implying he needs salvation "Will it lead to salvation-hopefully"  calling him unsaved... which is non-Christian?

You have said what you deny you said. An unsaved person is a non Christian, and you said he needed salvatioin. Thus you called this protestant man, non Christian.  If he needed to be lead to salvation, that would be saying he is unsaved, or non-Christian.

Unless, you'd like to recant. 

This thread sure seems hostile.  Why are you accusing Broach of saying something someone else said?  The name of the person who posted it is right by the post - seems hard to believe you could miss it.   Bearing false witness is a violation of the 9th commandment......

Unless, you'd like to recant.

Ravenlorre, ConsideringCatholicism, Constantine, what is your next name going to be?

CRP

[James Rondon]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

You may also want to check out broach's posts, while you're at it.

[James Rondon]

Broach... did you not state this...

"The fact is your husband has compromised his beliefs.  He has sacrificed a foundation of marble (Catholicism) for plastic - Legos (Trinitarian Protestantism).  Will it lead to salvation - hopefully."

and this....


Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

But, isn't saying my husband compromised his beliefs when he left Catholocism and was saved, and implying he needs salvation "Will it lead to salvation-hopefully"  calling him unsaved... which is non-Christian?

You have said what you deny you said. An unsaved person is a non Christian, and you said he needed salvatioin. Thus you called this protestant man, non Christian.  If he needed to be lead to salvation, that would be saying he is unsaved, or non-Christian.

Unless, you'd like to recant. 

I did not make the first statement.  If memory serves me correctly, that was CC.

It was the poster formerly known as ravenlorre.

[broach972]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

You may also want to check out broach's posts, while you're at it.

They are merely defensive in nature...usually responding to an outrage or misinformation of some kind.

I think the "League of Rome" thread sums up the attitude of many on this forum quite nicely.  Just another attack--one of many.  I wonder why it was locked?

[constantine]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

You may also want to check out broach's posts, while you're at it.

I was speaking about the tone of this thread.

2 Tim. 2:14

[James Rondon]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

You may also want to check out broach's posts, while you're at it.

They are merely defensive in nature...usually responding to an outrage or misinformation of some kind.

That reminds me, broach, are you planning on running for political office anytime soon?

[James Rondon]

This thread sure seems hostile.

Oh, you haven't seen anything yet.  You might want to check out the others in this section and the theology section in general.

You may also want to check out broach's posts, while you're at it.

I was speaking about the tone of this thread.

2 Tim. 2:14

Speaking of "tone", this thread was created in response to a thread entitled, "Protestant atrocities", which was started by broach.

[spurly]

Why can't we all just admit there were/are atrocities on both sides and leave it at that?


And, yes I am a middle child.

[WileyClarkson]

broach,

Wiley,
I appreciate your comments.  However, when one looks at the posts made by Catholics on this forum--we are doing one of two things:  constantly defending what the Church teaches or explaining them in an attempt to remove any misconceptions.  Even when we explain them, members of this forum continue to engage in misinformation and deception.

Not once have I ever referred to my Protestant brethren or their faith as "cultish," "anti-Christ," "non-Christain," and the list can go on and on.

I am all for civilized and productive discussion.  However, there are those on this forum that are determined to insult, mock, and disgrace the very faith I belong to.

Unfortunately, many have decided to leave.  This is what makes me sad.

The problem is that returning tit-for-tat doesn't accomplish anything, especially bringing back those who have left.  It only drives off more members.  The name of the forum is Grace-Centered.  I'd appreciate it if some one on the thread would explain to me where this is being shown to either side in this war between the protestants and catholics in this thread.

I agree with Spurly!!!!!!!!!!