Are Catholics Christians?

[The Voice of Reason]

...if i were to leave my bicycle outside, and it got stolen, would it be my fault?or would it be the crook's?

I would say that would depend on the neighborhood you live in. Either way, you would both have to shoulder some of the fault.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[HelpMe]

it is in no way the bike owner's fault for their bike being stolen whatever the neighborhood is it doesn't make stealing ok.you can blame the poor person, the persons(government) whom made them poor, but in no logical way can you assess blame to the owner(imo,if i may)

 

[The Voice of Reason]

it is in no way the bike owner's fault for their bike being stolen whatever the neighborhood is it doesn't make stealing ok.you can blame the poor person, the persons(government) whom made them poor, but in no logical way can you assess blame to the owner(imo,if i may)

I like this post, HelpMe - and your use of the IMO. For myself, if I leave something of value exposed to theft, and it is taken, I make two assumptions:
1) Whoever stole it needed it more than I did, and
2) I put that other person in the position of being tested - and, being human, they failed the test.

Thanks,
TVOr

 

[HelpMe]

2) I put that other person in the position of being tested - and, being human, they failed the test.

back to where i started this, theoretically,do you think it was eve/adam's fault?they didn't have the 'well i'm human and ya know, we're all sinners!' fallback excuse.

I like this post

then frubaluba me?

 

[No*s]

Yes, TVOR, the keyboard has many nuances. I just have to wonder if it is mightier than the pen .

Then you understand the logic. This sort of logic is what caused me to cease being a Protestant. The sad truth is that most people who repeat those types of arguments are often honest, and I have met many honest educated people who have repeated it. It's simply one of those misconceptions that gets repeated until somebody points it out. It certainly sounds rational enough on the surface.

 

[Scott1]

I must say, SOGFPP, I am struggling to find the connection between these two questions and the previous statement.

I just needed to clear a few things up..... it should (I pray) become clear in a post or two

Ok.... I think we're about done with this..... what I'd like to do now is get a summary of what you believe to clarify things..... Let me know how close I am and modify my summation in your reply.

(God bless you this is fun! :woohoo: )

1. We (humanity) are all made in God's image.
2. God is all powerfull, perfect, all-wise, and incapable of sin.
3. Humanity is not all powerfull, perfect, all-wise, and incapable of sin.
4. We are born with the ability to choose between good and evil acts.... to sin or not to sin.
5. Although humanity is born innocent and sinless, not having willfully committed any sin, but ALL humans will eventually sin (Rom 3:23) without exception because of selfishness and temptation.

That about sum things up?

 

[Linus]

(...this is fun! :woohoo: )

Amen to that :jam:.

1. We (humanity) are all made in God's image.
2. God is all powerfull, perfect, all-wise, and incapable of sin.
3. Humanity is not all powerfull, perfect, all-wise, and incapable of sin.
4. We are born with the ability to choose between good and evil acts.... to sin or not to sin.
5. Although humanity is born innocent and sinless, not having willfully committed any sin, but ALL humans will eventually sin (Rom 3:23) without exception because of selfishness and temptation.

That about sum things up?

I would say so. But on number 4, just to clarify, I would say we re born really not knowing anything, and a little later in life we develop the ability to choose between good and evil acts (though we may not know that they are either good or evil). I Hope that clarifies.

 

[Scott1]

I would say so. But on number 4, just to clarify, I would say we re born really not knowing anything, and a little later in life we develop the ability to choose between good and evil acts (though we may not know that they are either good or evil). I Hope that clarifies.

Yes, it does.... glad I got so close.... (you can tell I'm paying attention!)

Alright.... one LAST question:

Why does humanity....

.... born in the image of perfection

.... born innocent, pure and without the knowledge of good and evil

.... with the POWER to CHOOSE to sin or not to sin

choose to sin 100% percent of the time?

Peace,
Scott

 

[Linus]

(you can tell I'm paying attention!)

I can and I appreciate that fact.

Alright.... one LAST question:

Why does humanity....

.... born in the image of perfection

.... born innocent, pure and without the knowledge of good and evil

.... with the POWER to CHOOSE to sin or not to sin

choose to sin 100% percent of the time?

I thought I said this a few times before. Oh well, here we go again, but allow me to explain in a little more detail.

On the whole, humans sin because they are, at their deepest core, selfish. We want mainly, deep down inside, to please ourselves. There are those who sin and do not know that they are committing a sin (those who do not know the word of God).

BUT...

it's not like every time we are faced with the choice we choose to sin. But every time we do sin, it is a choice.

 

[Scott1]

On the whole, humans sin because they are, at their deepest core, selfish.

Why?

We as humans are:

.... born in the image of perfection

.... born innocent, pure and without the knowledge of good and evil

.... with the POWER to CHOOSE to sin or not to sin.

How can such a creature be, at their deepest core, selfish? That makes no sense.

Please explain how such a creature, as defined above:

..... somehow becomes a selfish being

.... and where you came to this knowledge.

 

[Linus]

Why?

Whay don't you ask Adam and Eve. They were created perfect (without original sin to weaken their state of being) and they still chose to sin.

We as humans are:

.... born in the image of perfection

.... born innocent, pure and without the knowledge of good and evil

.... with the POWER to CHOOSE to sin or not to sin.

How can such a creature be, at their deepest core, selfish? That makes no sense.

Please explain to me how such a creature (made in the image of perfection) could be born sinful.

Please explain how such a creature, as defined above:

..... somehow becomes a selfish being

.... and where you came to this knowledge.

I believe that God created us with that kind of nature. Look at a baby. Babies are some of the most selfish creatures in the world. They don't care about you, they just want to be fed, held, and played with so that they will be content. I don't think that those aspects of human nature ever go away. We want to please ourselves. Don't you want to please yourself? Make yourself happy? Such tendencies make it hard for us to obey all of God's commands, but that is why Jesus came to earth... to save the lost. Does that make sense? Read the Ecclesiastes passage again.

Ecclesiastes 7:29 - Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but they have sought out many devices

 

[Scott1]

I believe that God created us with that kind of nature. ....I don't think that those aspects of human nature ever go away. We want to please ourselves. Don't you want to please yourself? Make yourself happy? Such tendencies make it hard for us to obey all of God's commands, but that is why Jesus came to earth... to save the lost.

:woohoo:

And there we have it!

What you just described.............. is.............. drum roll, please............

ORIGINAL SIN.

Take one minute to clear your head of any previous conception of what sin is.

Now, looking at what you wrote above, and searching your heart, can you begin to understand that the early Church fathers when trying to figure out the EXACT SAME subject.....

....That selfishness.

.....That tedency towards doing what feels good, to please ourselves.

.... our selfish nature that makes it hard for us to obey God's commands........

explained this using the term original sin.

Original, meaning inherent in our nature....... and sin, not as you have been trying to define it, as a willful act, but as a condition.

A condition that you, very clearly described.

You see, you've believed in original sin all along..... you just don't call it the same thing as I do.

Peace,
Scott

 

[Linus]

And there we have it!

What you just described.............. is.............. drum roll, please............

ORIGINAL SIN.

Take one minute to clear your head of any previous conception of what sin is.

Now, looking at what you wrote above, and searching your heart, can you begin to understand that the early Church fathers when trying to figure out the EXACT SAME subject.....

....That selfishness.

.....That tedency towards doing what feels good, to please ourselves.

.... our selfish nature that makes it hard for us to obey God's commands........

explained this using the term original sin.

You call it original sin, I call it human nature. We already stated that we have differences in terminology. What we disagree on is the cause of our selfish nature. I think our discussion is going in circles...

Original, meaning inherent in our nature....... and sin, not as you have been trying to define it, as a willful act, but as a condition. A condition that you, very clearly described.

This is where I am (and have been) in disagreeance with you. Sin is always a choice. It is a giving in to this selfish nature. It is not a sin in itself to want to please yourelf, that is called temptation. But it is a sin to please yourself over God (sin). Like I said you always choose to sin when you sin. Name one sin that you committed that you could not have walked a way from. We are far from perfect beings, but we still always have the choice. We have to make a conscious decision. 1Corinthains 10:13 says that we will never be tempted beyond that which we cannot bear. What do you think that means? It seems to be saying that we can always walk away from any sin.

You see, you've believed in original sin all along..... you just don't call it the same thing as I do.

I agree with the concepth that we humans have an imprfect nature. I will disagree on the cause of that nature. Original sin is the concept that Adam's bringing sin into the world caused everyone else to be born with some sort of "condition of sin" within them. This is where I disagree. We are not born with any sin already in us. How can we be? We are created in the image of God (perfection, sinlessness).

What do you think about the Ecclesiastes passage that I have brought up?

 

[Scott1]

You call it original sin, I call it human nature.

Human nature?

You keep on saying that we don't agree on the cause and that Adam is most certainly NOT the cause....... but offer no opinion of what the cause is..... expect that it's our nature?

HOW?

First you say:

We are not born with any sin already in us. How can we be? We are created in the image of God (perfection, sinlessness).

but then somehow.... we change and :

....we humans have an imprfect nature.

HOW?

Don't tell me what you think did not happen or quote me more scripture talking about sin...... just answer the question.


Peace,
Scott

 

[Linus]

Human nature?

You keep on saying that we don't agree on the cause and that Adam is most certainly NOT the cause....... but offer no opinion of what the cause is..... expect that it's our nature?

HOW?

First you say:
but then somehow.... we change and :
HOW?

Don't tell me what you think did not happen or quote me more scripture talking about sin...... just answer the question.

Before I answer the question first let me start with a few simple questions of my own so as to establish some sort of common ground between us. If you disagree with the my opinions on these subjects than my response will hold no meaning for you. So, here we go:

1. Would you agree that God creates our (humans) spirits? Our "souls" if you will? Is God the createor of our spiritual being?

2. Would you agree that our physical wants and desires (selfishness, greed, etc.) are separate from our spiritual ones? In other words, do you agree that our spiritual desires are good, while our physical desires are selfish?

3. Was original sin caused by Adam and Eve?

 

[Green Gaia]

I'm baffled that this thread has gone on for 20 pages. Anyone who says that Catholics are not Christians are forgetting that the first Christians were ALL Catholic and it wasn't until the 16th century when the Eastern Orthodox church broke off from the Catholic church and the Protestant movement also began. Read your history people, we all have more in common than differences.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I'm baffled that this thread has gone on for 20 pages. Anyone who says that Catholics are not Christians are forgetting that the first Christians were ALL Catholic and it wasn't until the 16th century when the Eastern Orthodox church broke off from the Catholic church and the Protestant movement also began. Read your history people, we all have more in common than differences.

I'm laughing about this thread. If you read the original post, the point of the thread was really geared toward making those members of the Protestant religions aware of exactly this point - ALL Protestants (i.e. Baptists, Methodists, etc.) are offshoots of the Catholic religion. For anyone that is a Protestant to claim that they are Christians and that Catholics are not, is laughable, as it reveals the narrowmindedness of the position.

I love it when one of the threads that I start enjoys a fair amount of input, and this thread is no exception. Like Maize, though, I never dreamed we could still be beating this dead horse after 20 pages.

If it gives the Theists on the site an opportunity to learn from each other, then the thread is still serving its purpose.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[No*s]

I'm baffled that this thread has gone on for 20 pages. Anyone who says that Catholics are not Christians are forgetting that the first Christians were ALL Catholic and it wasn't until the 16th century when the Eastern Orthodox church broke off from the Catholic church and the Protestant movement also began. Read your history people, we all have more in common than differences.

No, there isn't any question that Roman Catholics are Christians. However, you offer an interpretation of history there. Those of us who are Orthodox see Rome overstepping its bounds and separating from the other four Patriarchs, and thus, Roman Catholicism broke off.

I bet the Non-Chalcedonians feel something similar in regard to the Council of Chalcedon with Regard to both Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

There was a split between Patriarch of Old Rome and the Patriarchs of New Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria over theological issues regarding papal authority (really the root), the Filioque, celebacy of the priests, unleavened bread in the Eucharist, and probably still others I can't remember.

From our perspective we are the original and Old Rome broke away from us by innovating. From her perspective it is as you say. Again the Non-Chalcedonians will feel that way about each of us, and their perspective shoudln't be discounted simply because they have far fewer people.

So, I will say that history doesn't necessarily teach your particular point.

 

[Scott1]

Maize and TVOR..... I really don't think anyone is beating a dead horse..... this thread has evolved to a more complete discourse on what our differences are.... the source of the question.....and I hope it will show, in much better detail that a simple "yes" or "no"..... is that Catholics are most certainly Christian, and more importantly (at least to me) that our differences may not be as great as some believe.

 

[Scott1]

Linus
1. Would you agree that God creates our (humans) spirits? Our "souls" if you will? Is God the createor of our spiritual being?

God creates everything.

2. Would you agree that our physical wants and desires (selfishness, greed, etc.) are separate from our spiritual ones? In other words, do you agree that our spiritual desires are good, while our physical desires are selfish?

Selfishness and greed and not physical wants.... hunger is a physical want. Selfishness and greed and actions based on a disordered desire to have something another has or to have more. You are confusing the desire for material, bodily satisfation as purely physical.... but their root cause is a spiritual desire. To committ adultry is a sin of the spirit..... the physical act is performed by the body, but it is not a physical desire.
All sin is spiritual.

3. Was original sin caused by Adam and Eve?

Well.... that's a tough one. I'll try to give you the entire answer:

Yes........... and no.

The Catechism teaches:
390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.

So.... now we are getting into my educated guess..... I think that Genesis and the account that Catholics describe as the story of original sin... "the fall".... happened.... but I can't say for certain that Genesis is a literal tale meant to teach us about the persons Adam and Eve. To be honest.... I (of course) believe it's the infallible word of God, but I don't believe that this story should be read literally. God (in my humble opinion) put it there to show our origin and to explain the unexplainable: why we have a sinful nature and why there is evil in the world.

Hope this helps.... looking forward to your answer.

Scott