Catholics and Christians

Catholics don't worship mary, they honor her. Big difference. Mexico may be different, i don't live there. But all the catholic priests and monks i've talked to about it say we honor her, not worship her. For that would be completely wrong.

In taoism, nothing is worshiped, only respected and honored. I cannot worship what I do not know, therefore I respect my "do not know" mind, and I respect the true Tao, because it is beyond my recognition.

:talk: The Church, that is, God and his people, are clearly and Biblically 100% an eternal church. It is invisible to us because it is purely heavenly. Denomination is meaningless. Jesus NOWHERE in the N.T condemns denominations. He does say that many so-called Christians will come to him in eternity and he will turn them away saying "I never knew you". I doubt this has much to do with right beliefs or practices, rather the spiritual condition of an INDIVIDUALS heart.

Please Lord Shine your light in our hearts! Amen!

Concerning the Peter/Rock/Church/Jesus thing. Some Christians think that Jesus was refering to the REVELATION that Peter had concerning his true nature. Read the whole account:

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "who do people say the Son of Man is?" They replied, "some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
"But what about you ?" he asked. "Who do you say i am?" Simon Peter answered "You are the Christ, the son of the living God."...

Summary- 1) Who is Jesus?
2) various opinions
3) Peter Knows

...Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in Heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter ('rock') , and on this rock (i.e revelation- the central theme) i will build my church, and the gates of hades (death's realm) will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom (again, revelation of Jesus); whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ" (Matthew 16:13-20 N.I.V, bold and() mine))

Anywayznuffsaid. God Bless.

As for Bible passages that can be interpreted as support for predestination, I suggest 2 Corinthians 3:5 and John 15:5, and perhaps also Phil. 2:13. You are most welcome to quote counterexamples.[/quote]

Paul talks at great lengh concerning predestination in Romans too.

God bless.

Okay after a bible study here's what I make of predestination:

It does happen, to a point. There is a plan God has for each of us, but to follow the plan we have to accept Christ. God does not say, "You, you and you, with me, the rest of you, go to hell." Rather, he says, "You do this, you do that, you do that and this." Where free will comes in is whether you want to follow God's plan for you or not. And we are made to fit into God's plan, so you will be happy and satisfied while doing it because you will have the talents and the enjoyment.

I love my pastor :mrgreen:

The Ocelot

I went to a Presbyterian church as a kid and now I go to a Catholic high school, so I can help answer this question.

There are a lot of big differences between the Catholic Church and the various Protestant churches, but also a lot of similarities. In general, the Catholic Church's teachings are much vaster, diverse, and complex- the Church passes judgement/tries to explain EVERYTHING. Protestant Churches tend to focus more on what the Bible teaches, rather than what Tradition teaches (Tradition meaning all the Church decisions etc that came later and sometimes have no basis in the Bible). Catholics believe that the Church is "inspired by the Holy Spirit" and therefore can add more doctrine as time goes on, while Protestants just stick to the Bible. One especially redeeming quality about Catholics though: they don't take the Bible literally, and have no problem with the theory of evolution.

One of the things which I find interesting is the way in which Catholics and Protestants regard each other. Usually, they view the "other side" as kind of odd religious nuts who are overly strict about trivial beliefs, and as having many doctrines that don't make any sense.

The most humorous thing about this is that all of these observations on each other are pretty accurate

Mr_Spinkles,

To some extent it is true that Protestants focus more on what is felt as the Word of God (= the Bible), rather than on what human tradition teaches.

I fear, however, that there also is a cultural gap operating here. In the Church of Sweden, which is Lutheran, you will find all kinds of beliefs. A friend of mine said that she could not remarry after her divorce. On the other end of the scale of Bible fidelity, the archbishop of Sweden does not believe that the birth of Jesus was miraculous. The main difference to the Catholic church(es) is that nobody in another country can kick the archbishop out of the Church or even out of office. The Church is made up of humans, so it cannot possibly be infallible. I suppose that a Catholic, clergy or not, who openly declared that Jesus' birth was natural would be excommunicated by order of Rome.

Evolution is no problem in Sweden. My sister, a biology teacher, tells her students that there are other views than evolution. That is by her own free choice; it would be perfectly OK not to mention alternatives, and nobody would even react. On the other hand, in the improbable case that a biology teacher (in any kind of school) would teach creationism, that teacher would probably lose his/her job even before the news hit the front pages.

I agree what master vigil said.
Many christians are taught we catholics are not christian at all. We pray to saints and Mary, but not God.

We honor the saints and Mary as family only. God is still the head of the church. The pope is its caretaker as the pastors and reverends of other churches are.

Catholic in Greek means "universal" so we are a universal church.

The others churches did have a case in finding abuses and deterioration of the catholic faith, so they left to form their own views and creeds.
I saw the Martin Luther movie with my Lutheran friend. He did not like it, but I loved it.
Martin was right to stop the indulgence corruption, but he left the church after he wanted to establish his own vision of the perfect church, which caused the Peasant Revolt of 1,000's of catholics and protestants.

We are in the Christian family, but the catholic and greek orthodox churches are the closes to the 1st century church we have.

The Lutherans and Anglicans are just over 400 years old.

Read more about the catholic faith and what we believe. The Catechism is good. EWTN is great. Go to a Mass an ask questions. Find out.

It not good either for the other faiths to address us a pagan, devil of a pope church.
That is hate, and falling into Satan's grip when pastors tell you this.

Master Vigil said:

Catholics don't worship mary, they honor her. Big difference.

Click to expand...

Not sure if I buy this. Worship is another word for to honor in greek and aramaic text. Like "shaking hands" "to salute" "kneel down" "kiss". I fail to see the "big difference".

Dudley wrote about Concerning the Peter/Rock/Church/Jesus thingy when the greek and aramic word used for Peter defines "little pebble". Jesus actually said to peter "You are a little pebble" Then Jesus said on this rock(greek word used here for "rock" defines differently that the word translated into "peter" indicating a much larger rock(talking about himself) he would build his church.)) Jesus knew about the denominations that would come. Don't quote me this is only my understandings.

If one is to trust any writing whatsoever you should have an understanding of etymology and the original language it was first scribed in. The english language is just too versatile and flexible to take translations at face value.

True blood,

"You should have an understanding of etymology and the original language" before you write. Unfortunately, we don't know what what said in Aramaic. But the Greek text (Matthew 16:18) has Petros for Peter and petra for "rock, cliff, a rocky mountain." Certainly no pebbles there. There is even a synonym "petros" for "petra". So in no way the Greek can be interpreted as to mean "little pebble".

anders said:

"You should have an understanding of etymology and the original language" before you write

Click to expand...

I disagree about that. I'm still learning but I had stated one should have a bit o understanding in this field to trust a writing, not to write. Its my right to be wrong. Etymology isn't a prerequisite for writing down my thoughts. However the fact that the greek words used here are different lead me to believe Jesus didn't say he was going to build his church upon peter as many believe

true blood,

I thought that I made it clear that the Greek words petros and petra are synonyms. I have looked at the text to see if it were possible to interpret it as "Hey, Peter, on this rock where we are standing ...", but the grammar forbids it. The one and only possible interpretation is that the church was to be built on Petros the Rock, and there is no way that any back-translation into Aramaic would change that meaning.

If you suggest meanings of words, you must accept that I explain the meanings of words; that's why I threw your sentence back at you.

You're right and you're wrong. The word "Peter" is the Greek word petros, meaning "the small grain-like substance of sand." Every time the wind blows, the tiny grain blows. The Greek word for "rock" is petra, meaning "a solid mass of unmovable stone". The scripture does not declare that the Church of the Gospel is built upon Peter. On the contrary, it speaks saying "You are Peter [petros, a grain of sand; you, Peter, blow around with everything], but upon this rock [petra, a solid mass of stone, which is Christ], I will build my church." The Church in the Gospels was built by Jesus Christ himself, who was the bridegroom, and the "called out" are the bride.

Another example why we have denominations and different sects all in the name of religion.

The common Catholic belief is that Christ was talking about Peter when he said that "...on this rock I will build my Church..." This provides the basis for office of the papacy. However, in Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod teaching, Christ was not talking about Peter but about Peter's previous confession.

Read Below:

Matthew 16: 15-18 (NIV)

"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it."

Indeed, Christ meant that upon Peter's confession he would build His on Earth not on Peter himself. How can the church be built on a sinful human being instead of on God's saving message?

I made a grammar boo boo. Please insert church after "His" on the second to last line.

true blood,

I think you may be using a dictionary of modern Greek. In my dictionary of NT Greek, petros is clearly a synonym of petra. Translations into other languges (and I have checked several) do not make any difference between the meanings of petros and petra.

Even if Jesus did build his church on his disciple Peter, that's still not a very good argument for the office of Pope. Jesus never said "and all the bishops of Rome who follow you". In fact, it is my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong) that Peter did not designate a successor.

Interestingly enough Peter did not designate a successor as you quite rightly said, even more so what seperated Peter from any Pope was that he was a manifest son, complete formation in Christ. Hence the scripture Mark 16:17-18. This is something which religeous Churches are unable to duplicate. This is due to the fact that the third person the Holy Spirit is grieved, giving way to a dead branch.Peter knew the Heavenly Jerusalem and worshipped there in spirit and in truth. He worshipped on the true rock which has no bearing on buildings or denominations, rather he partook in the fullness of the Sonship in Christ and this was his duty, that we may come to know Christ in his fullness and Glory in a deep and personal way, a matter of the Heart. As there were no early clergy in the Church as we know it(Pope`s, Bishops etc) it goes to show how man has completely perverted the Church from Peter`s time to now as we know it Religeon, a form of Godliness without the power!

ocelot; research further and u will know better statements, answers, and comparisons; as your comprehension needs deeper insights.