1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are Catholics Christians?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by The Voice of Reason, Oct 1, 2004.

  1. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,467
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    Religion:
    Christian
    Linus,

    The human nature of greed and selfishness arose through the original sin though, had Adam and Eve not ate of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, aforementioned nature would not be present.
     
  2. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    Then what prompted Adam and Eve to eat the fruit? They were tempted and gave in to that temptation. Does that mean they were morrally depreaved as well? Did God created them with original sin? They sinned because they wanted to. THey had the choice not to eat from the tree, But they did it anyway. The same happens with us. We are tempted, then we give in and we sin.
     
  3. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,467
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    Religion:
    Christian
    The serpent prompted Eve to eat it, and Eve prompted Adam.

    They were not tempted by their own nature though, an outside force(the serpent) specifically led them to do it.

    No, they were created perfect.

    I never said they didn't have the choice, only that before eating of the fruit sin was not in human nature.
     
  4. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    And how is it any different for us? We are tempted by satan's wiles (1 Peter 5:8), and evenetually we give in (Romans 3:23). The circumstances are no differnt for us (except for the fact that we have redemption from our sins through Jesus Christ).


    The same thing happens to us. I never said theat we are tempted by our own nature. I merely said that we are greedy and selfish and want to give in to temptation. That is why we sin.

    Then why did they choose to sin? If sin wasn't in human nature before the eating of the fruit, then Adam and Eve could not have been able to sin. But, since Adam and Eve did sin, there are 2 assumptions we must make: 1. Adam and eve were created with original sin (which you have already claimed is not the case) or 2. That human nature was greedy and selfish before Adam and Eve sinned. What else can we assume?
     
  5. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,193
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    James 1:13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

    It doesn't say to blame Adam either.
     
  6. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,193
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    I believe "each one" in the passage from James refers to EVERYONE including Adam and Eve.
     
  7. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,467
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    Religion:
    Christian
    People can and will go against human nature all the time. Adam and Eve went against their perfect nature and sinned.

    I do not blame Adam, I know of no one who does.
     
  8. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,193
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    If you say that Adam is the origin of sin, then in fact you are blaming him for everyone's damnation.
     
  9. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    But why? Weren't they created with an absence of original so as not to be corrupted? Should they not have realized that it was wrong and turned and saved themselves from sin? If original sin is what corrupts us then why did Adam and Eve become corrupt?

    You blame Adam for original sin. By claiming that Adam brought sin into the world you are blaming him for original sin (and therefore the condemnation of all).
     
  10. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    So darn close..... I think the problem is your definition of original sin Linus.

    We are made in God's image.... why would we be greedy and selfish?
    Show me chapter and verse.

    You need to understand that original sin is the deprivation of sanctifying grace. In the present condition of the human race, we cannot function properly if we have been conceived with original sin. Being conceived in this way damages the person such that they are born with a fallen nature. This damage is known as the stain (Latin, macula) of original sin.

    Ok.... still getting close. "Fault".... implies that there is a person to blame, ie. a result of a personal choice.... but what about the flip side to this:

    How does a person have faith? God has no power? It's a personal choice?

    Scott
     
  11. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,467
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    Religion:
    Christian
    They did not know the difference between right and wrong, all they knew was that the Lord told them not to eat out of that one tree.

    I do not blame Adam for mine or anyone else's sin, nor do I blame a mass murderer's dad for the former's actions(but it is a fact that if the dad had not had the child the child could not have murdered the people). We all have our choices, the blame for sin lies solely on our own shoulders, however had Adam and Eve not eaten of the tree their line would have continued to be perfect(until/unless another outside source such as the seprent tempted a descedndent into sin).
     
  12. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,193
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    I quoted James 1 above... it talks about why ALL of sin... and it includes "evil desires".
     
  13. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" spells this out: "for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die." The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil"symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.


    Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God's command. This is what man's first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

    In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully "divinized" by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to "be like God", but "without God, before God, and not in accordance with God".Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness. They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

    I don't, the Bible does. :) One man brought it in.... one man takes it away.

    Geez.... it's almost like God planned it that way or something.....;)

    Scott
     
  14. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    If we are made in God's image, how could we be born with sin?

    It is just natural to want to please yourself. Had God created us to be perfect, all-wise, beings incapable of sin, there woud be no need for salvation which He has freely given us. What glory is there in worship from people as perfect as God? He created us with the ability to choose between doing good and evil, the sad part is that we selfishly so often seek to do evil. Ecclesiastes 7:29 says, "This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes." How can man be born with sin when created in the image of God?

    Born with a fallen nature? Where is that stated or even implied in the scripture?

    So sin is not a choice at all? Are we forced to sin? Name one sin you have commited that you could not have walked away from and said, "no, I will not do this." I keep mentioning Romans 3:23 as saying that "all have sinned." In other words, all have commited sin. This suggests that sin is a choice, not some sort of state of human nature. But you seem to either be ignoring that fact or you simply don't understand it.


    A person gets faith by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Romans 10:7).

    God is all powerfull. He can do/create/say whatever he wants.

    I must say, SOGFPP, I am struggling to find the connection between these two questions and the previous statement.
     
  15. No*s

    No*s Captain Obvious

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    5,917
    Ratings:
    +471
    I've noticed several people claiming that the word "Catholic" simply means "universal," but no clear rebuttal. While I'm not "Roman Catholic," I do have reason to dispute that. We have no Church Father extant who uses the word in that fasion. Not a single one. We do have Church Fathers extant who use it to exclude groups and individuals.

    Examples:

    1). The Creeds, whether the Nicene Creed or the Apostles Creed. All creeds are designed to exclude people. Creeds only function by exclusion. When a Creed states "I believe in One God," it excludes those who believe in many. When it says "I believe in the Catholic Church," it excludes other churches. Saying this is "universal" and encapsulates everyone ignores a creed's basic function.

    2). St. Ignatius in 107 said that "Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church." Much of the bulk of his letters are taken up in refuting beliefs of Gnostic break-offs. He was a student of the Apostle John, so I think he knew what he was talking about.

    3). Later, we have St. Cyril heading the Council of Carthage about the baptisms from other groups. It frequently states things like "Unless...they receive baptism in the Catholic Church." Those 87 bishops were excluding people from other churches. There is no other way to take their statements.

    Examples like this may be multiplied at will, but I think they make the point. The onus is on anyone who wants to say Catholic simply means "universal" to explain 1). How it fits those creeds and 2). To be able to give examples of people in the Early Church using it that way.

    I know there are disagreements I'd have with Roman Catholics and the Non-Chalcedonians over what constitutes the Catholic Church, but I think we all agree: it just ain't everybody.
     
  16. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason Doctor of Thinkology

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    7,678
    Ratings:
    +1,224
    Hello No*s - welcome to the forum.

    I think the difference is in the capitalization of the word -
    catholic (lower case "s") does have an accepted definition meaning "universal" and, when uncapitalized, is often used to indicate universality.
    Catholic (upper case "S") is most often used whe one is referring to the Catholic Church or Catholicism as a religion.

    Others might disagree, but that is certainly the context that I have been putting the word into.

    Thanks,
    TVOR
     
  17. No*s

    No*s Captain Obvious

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    5,917
    Ratings:
    +471
    Thanks TVOR

    That is exactly what I'm responding to, though :). The idea of a little "c" Catholic and a big "C" Catholic is completely foreign to the definition of the word. As far as we know, the Church created the word. The little c for "universal" and big C for Catholic came way later, when many schismatics broke of of the RCC and still wanted to lay claim to the title. It does appear as something like "universal" in secular writers like Polybius, but the Christians used it universally as I've described.

    When people lay claim to it, they lay claim to it in order to use the Apostle's Creed or harmonize themselves with various early writers. That is still just a wee bit deceptive.
     
  18. No*s

    No*s Captain Obvious

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    5,917
    Ratings:
    +471
    Oops. I should have been clearer on the "For all we know, the Church made up the word." "Made up" should have been "redefined," because it did exist prior to that (as the post points out, in Polybius). I just got to typing in a flurry, and I apologize.
     
  19. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason Doctor of Thinkology

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    7,678
    Ratings:
    +1,224
    A keyboard has many nuances, No*s. :)
    After thinking about your post, I would have to say that I agree with you. For whatever reason, the fact remains, that most people would consider the little "c" catholic to be interchangeable with "universal" and, in this case, perception has become reality.

    Thanks,
    TVOR
     
  20. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    didn't eve sin first?didn't satan lure her into sinning?if i were to leave my bicycle outside, and it got stolen, would it be my fault?or would it be the crook's?
     
Loading...