Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I knew you were going to say that. That wasn’t my claim, I just quickly phrased it that way in order to differentiate Catholics from non-Catholics. That said, Catholic or non-Catholic, regardless of what denomination one belongs to, one still has to be saved, or else you’re just going through the motions, and that is not much different than a non-Christian. And my earlier point was that Jesus made it super clear, you must be born again. That is what salvation is!
This "saved" thing is part of your denomination, your specific theology in whatever Christian group you belong to. From what I've seen of the "saved" in the last few years, the entire thing is bogus since the "born agains" neither uphold the teachings of Jesus or seek to carry them out. It's some evangelical stuff led by frankie graham or focus on the family or somebody. It's your sect. Nobody else has to join it. It's not up to you to define the Christian faith.
I think that the country and the world might benefit from public readings of the Sermon on the Mount.
I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
I was taught that the Trinity was not a mystery to be solved but a relationship to be entered into.Huh? Like toes and feet "Salvation" is just a fact of life; one is not ASSURED of course (at the risk of committing the sin of presumption) until Judgement is passed after death. Can't fool God even if we can fool ourselves.
Greg
Your first sentence "is just a fact of life" almost sounds like you believe everyone gets saved...that is not biblical. I'm sorry but I disagree with your beliefs. No religious ceremony is going to save someone. Especially an infant being baptized, who has zero idea what is going on. Being born again is not a church ceremony, where many people at that age (confirmation) are just going through the motions because their parents dragged them to church. It's infinitely more than that.
I did a video having to do with this topic, maybe I'll share it here if anyone wants to see it.
Can't fool God, Ma'am. It's not the action but the movement of the Holy Spirit. A look at the theology of the Church explains it better than I can. That's why I don't do Apologomenas on talk boards. But if you were interested you would have examined the Church's teaching on it and not gone on hearsay and generlisations. I challenge you to check it out with the Holy Spirit to guide you. That usually does it. Oh: and I do refer to Aquinas on this.
Article 1. Whether Baptism is the mere washing?
Objection 1. It seems that Baptism is not the mere washing. For the washing of the body is something transitory: but Baptism is something permanent. Therefore Baptism is not the mere washing; but rather is it "the regeneration, the seal, the safeguarding, the enlightenment," as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv).
Objection 2. Further, Hugh of St. Victor says (De Sacram. ii) that "Baptism is water sanctified by God's word for the blotting out of sins." But the washing itself is not water, but a certain use of water.
Objection 3. Further, Augustine says (Tract. lxxx super Joan.): "The word is added to the element, and this becomes a sacrament." Now, the element is the water. Therefore Baptism is the water and not the washing.
On the contrary, It is written (Sirach 34:30): "He that washeth himself [baptizatur] after touching the dead, if he touch him again, what does his washing avail?" It seems, therefore, that Baptism is the washing or bathing.
I answer that, In the sacrament of Baptism, three things may be considered: namely, that which is "sacrament only"; that which is "reality and sacrament"; and that which is "reality only." That which is sacrament only, is something visible and outward; the sign, namely, of the inward effect: for such is the very nature of a sacrament. And this outward something that can be perceived by the sense is both the water itself and its use, which is the washing. Hence some have thought that the water itself is the sacrament: which seems to be the meaning of the passage quoted from Hugh of St. Victor. For in the general definition of a sacrament he says that it is "a material element": and in defining Baptism he says it is "water."
But this is not true. For since the sacraments of the New Law effect a certain sanctification, there the sacrament is completed where the sanctification is completed. Now, the sanctification is not completed in water; but a certain sanctifying instrumental virtue, not permanent but transient, passes from the water, in which it is, into man who is the subject of true sanctification. Consequently the sacrament is not completed in the very water, but in applying the water to man, i.e. in the washing. Hence the Master (iv, 3) says that "Baptism is the outward washing of the body done together with the prescribed form of words."
The Baptismal character is both reality and sacrament: because it is something real signified by the outward washing; and a sacramental sign of the inward justification: and this last is the reality only, in this sacrament—namely, the reality signified and not signifying.
Reply to Objection 1. That which is both sacrament and reality—i.e. the character—and that which is reality only—i.e. the inward justification—remain: the character remains and is indelible, as stated above (III:63:5); the justification remains, but can be lost. Consequently Damascene defined Baptism, not as to that which is done outwardly, and is the sacrament only; but as to that which is inward. Hence he sets down two things as pertaining to the character—namely, "seal" and "safeguarding"; inasmuch as the character which is called a seal, so far as itself is concerned, safeguards the soul in good. He also sets down two things as pertaining to the ultimate reality of the sacrament—namely, "regeneration" which refers to the fact that man by being baptized begins the new life of righteousness; and "enlightenment," which refers especially to faith, by which man receives spiritual life, according to Habakkuk 2 (Hebrews 10:38; cf. Habakkuk 2:4): "But (My) just man liveth by faith"; and Baptism is a sort of protestation of faith; whence it is called the "Sacrament of Faith." Likewise Dionysius defined Baptism by its relation to the other sacraments, saying (Eccl. Hier. ii) that it is "the principle that forms the habits of the soul for the reception of those most holy words and sacraments"; and again by its relation to heavenly glory, which is the universal end of all the sacraments, when he adds, "preparing the way for us, whereby we mount to the repose of the heavenly kingdom"; and again as to the beginning of spiritual life, when he adds, "the conferring of our most sacred and Godlike regeneration."
Reply to Objection 2. As already stated, the opinion of Hugh of St. Victor on this question is not to be followed. Nevertheless the saying that "Baptism is water" may be verified in so far as water is the material principle of Baptism: and thus there would be "causal predication."
Reply to Objection 3. When the words are added, the element becomes a sacrament, not in the element itself, but in man, to whom the element is applied, by being used in washing him. Indeed, this is signified by those very words which are added to the element, when we say: "I baptize thee," etc.
SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The sacrament of Baptism (Tertia Pars, Q. 66)
To my understanding Baptism is not to do so much with the action of Man but with the Grace of God. One must remember that, without Faith, no sacrament comes to fulfillment. It is a fact that, with regard to myself, there was no single "road to Damascus" experience. I have always accepted the reality of Christ, first as a child, and later , well, still as a child. salvation through Christ has just always been a fact to me. As a consequence later in life I became more aware of the Movement of the Spirit in my life. Again no blinding flash but just a deep realisation that Jesus IS Lord and Savior and that the Holy Spirit IS; both leading to the Father. Now ask me to explain the Trinity and I cannot; three folds in one blanket is as good as any but as it is a Mystery I simply stand in awe and accept in faith.
Now you were suggesting that a quick dip and oiling were somewhat superficial?? lol
Greg
I re-read your post, and then I deleted my reply to you from a little earlier. I'm going to reply again, now that I read your post again.
That's good, if it is taught that faith is necessary to go along with the ceremony. then the question must be asked, is it your belief that the ceremony is necessary? What exactly is that faith in?
ETA: I grew up going to Catholic church, I went through all of it... first communion, confirmation, etc. And as far as I can remember, no one ever taught me that faith must accompany those sacraments. Also, no one ever told me to read the bible, and no one even talked to me about my need for salvation at all. It just wasn't talked about, in my experience.
The reason I bring this up is because while what you're saying sounds good... I think there are probably tons of people who went through those sacraments without a true faith and an understanding of one's spiritual condition and without having a true change of mind/heart. And there are probably many people who counted on those sacraments as what "saved" them, which is a false belief.
We were definitely taught that FAITH was the basis of all Catholicism. Were you taught by Religious (Nuns, Brothers, Priests) or Lay people? I do admit that I dug a bit deeper; I actually listened to sermons. lol
In the hundreds of millions of Catholics who are there I am sure there are millions who haven't ta clue nor the interest to dig a little into their religion. There is a saying about growing up "in the Faith". I was fortunate that it was just always there; always my default position. That is why I call it a "fact"; it was just a part of living.
Were there times when I doubted? Not really but I did occasionally backslide. I could be a naughty boy.
Greg
Best advice I ever got.
Yes...because we cannot challenge others on their claims...God forbid.Now is that anyway for a Christian to behave?You know exactly zero about the apostles and the interactions they had other than the words they provided. So shut your blasphemous trap.I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
Stop while you're behind...He tried to reform it. All you have to do is look at his ministry. He first ministered to the Jews.Jesus was/is the expected Messiah. He didn't reform Judaism, He fulfilled it.He was a reformer of Hinduism as Jesus was a reformer of Judaism.Those people are going to hell.How so?You effectively have no idea what you are talking about.
How is this any different than Buddhism and Hinduism?
Buddhism is effectively a sect of Hinduism.
Buddhism is not a sect of Hinduism.
Buddhists are atheists...Hindus are Henotheistic.
Buddha was born a Hindu. However, Hinduism and Buddhism, as Christianity and Judaism DRASTICALLY diverge on many core concepts.
By saying shut your trap?Disp
Yes...because we cannot challenge others on their claims...God forbid.Now is that anyway for a Christian to behave?You know exactly zero about the apostles and the interactions they had other than the words they provided. So shut your blasphemous trap.But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
You misspelled winning.Stop while you're behind...He tried to reform it. All you have to do is look at his ministry. He first ministered to the Jews.Jesus was/is the expected Messiah. He didn't reform Judaism, He fulfilled it.He was a reformer of Hinduism as Jesus was a reformer of Judaism.Those people are going to hell.How so?
How is this any different than Buddhism and Hinduism?
Buddhism is effectively a sect of Hinduism.
Buddhism is not a sect of Hinduism.
Buddhists are atheists...Hindus are Henotheistic.
Buddha was born a Hindu. However, Hinduism and Buddhism, as Christianity and Judaism DRASTICALLY diverge on many core concepts.
You know exactly zero about the apostles and the interactions they had other than the words they provided. So shut your blasphemous trap.This "saved" thing is part of your denomination, your specific theology in whatever Christian group you belong to. From what I've seen of the "saved" in the last few years, the entire thing is bogus since the "born agains" neither uphold the teachings of Jesus or seek to carry them out. It's some evangelical stuff led by frankie graham or focus on the family or somebody. It's your sect. Nobody else has to join it. It's not up to you to define the Christian faith.
I think that the country and the world might benefit from public readings of the Sermon on the Mount.
I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
Unfortunately, we don't know what "the truth" is. It depends on who you ask and they don't know it either.This "saved" thing is part of your denomination, your specific theology in whatever Christian group you belong to. From what I've seen of the "saved" in the last few years, the entire thing is bogus since the "born agains" neither uphold the teachings of Jesus or seek to carry them out. It's some evangelical stuff led by frankie graham or focus on the family or somebody. It's your sect. Nobody else has to join it. It's not up to you to define the Christian faith.
I think that the country and the world might benefit from public readings of the Sermon on the Mount.
I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
In a lot of ways what you are saying is correct; once Humans are involved there is the Human Factor. But nit picking in order to throw away the TRUTH isn't what it's about either. God gave us HUMAN faculties so we make the best of them that we can; remember can't fool God. But the End Times stuff? Couldn't care less; we know NOT the hour!! So no goody two shoes last minute repentance because the end is nigh; just the hack stuff of Living your life IN FAITH.
Greg
Unfortunately, we don't know what "the truth" is. It depends on who you ask and they don't know it either.I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
In a lot of ways what you are saying is correct; once Humans are involved there is the Human Factor. But nit picking in order to throw away the TRUTH isn't what it's about either. God gave us HUMAN faculties so we make the best of them that we can; remember can't fool God. But the End Times stuff? Couldn't care less; we know NOT the hour!! So no goody two shoes last minute repentance because the end is nigh; just the hack stuff of Living your life IN FAITH.
Greg
You know exactly zero about the apostles and the interactions they had other than the words they provided. So shut your blasphemous trap.I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
No. I won't. Bet you think that Saul/Paul was an apostle. He never even met Jesus. What is this "end times" horseshit and why is this guy graham going around spouting it? Tired of this hocus-pokus.
And what makes you believe they can hear your prayers from heaven? Where in the Bible does it say that departed saints hear and pray for those who so beseech them. I mean, I can imagine that a saint who dies may ask GOD for help for those he left behind. However, that is a far cry from imagining that Christians who have died have a permanent connection with everyone on Earth. I believe such a notion is a TRADITION invented by man.Ridiculous! Catholics ask those that were what you call saved, to pray for them.... they are not asking the saints to save them or treating them like they are gods....Catholics pray to intercessors...not always the lord. This is blasphemy.Does anyone know the difference between a Catholic and a Baptist?
It is like all the prayers Republicans send out for those mothers and fathers who lost their child in a school shooting.... they "send their prayers", through asking Christians to pray for them.... are you saying THAT is BLASPHEMY?
Or do you believe the saints are DEAD after death and can't pray for anyone... like your fellow Christians would send out prayers for you?
I have always looked at the New Testament as the owners manual and the Old Testament as the technical manual.
And what makes you believe they can hear your prayers from heaven? Where in the Bible does it say that departed saints hear and pray for those who so beseech them. I mean, I can imagine that a saint who dies may ask GOD for help for those he left behind. However, that is a far cry from imagining that Christians who have died have a permanent connection with everyone on Earth. I believe such a notion is a TRADITION invented by man.Ridiculous! Catholics ask those that were what you call saved, to pray for them.... they are not asking the saints to save them or treating them like they are gods....Catholics pray to intercessors...not always the lord. This is blasphemy.Does anyone know the difference between a Catholic and a Baptist?
It is like all the prayers Republicans send out for those mothers and fathers who lost their child in a school shooting.... they "send their prayers", through asking Christians to pray for them.... are you saying THAT is BLASPHEMY?
Or do you believe the saints are DEAD after death and can't pray for anyone... like your fellow Christians would send out prayers for you?
Everything - every culture - is a tradition invented by men. Your problem with Saints is not a problem, because a Catholic has not to believe in the might of Saints. Example: My wife is a Lutheran - I am a Catholic. I am a genius in misplacing things - what costs me a lot of time to seek - and sometimes I have to accept, that I am a nearly perfect misplacer. Not so my wife: she finds always everything. I asked her, how she is doing it, and she answered: "In worst case I ask Saint Antonius for help and he gives me a tip.". My problem: I see a superstition in such a form of belief - but looks like Saint Antonius doesn't care about, so he helps her but not me.
PS: The reason why we invented the bible is by the way the same why we invented Saints. The bible is a canonized book of books - what means it is said with the authority of the church, that the words in the bible show very well essentials of the Christian religion. This textes are authentic. This doesn|t mean on the other hand that anything else is wrong, what exists outside of the bible: the whole creation is for example made by the word of god. It's often good to trust in the bible - but it's wrong to think the bible is a god.
And "Saints" is a similiar problem. It existst a list of Saints, so it is for everyone easy to find a saint out of this list, who is able to inspire someone in her/his own concrete life. And it's very interesting to see women and men, who were called from god. But this doesn't mean this list is complete and/or without dazzling figures. But such a list of Saints minimizes rank growth. An expression like "Saint Donald Trump" or "Saint Che Guevarra" would be for sure not be a Catholic expression for example.
The Scripture was inspired by the moving of the Holy Spirit upon the hearts of men. What became the Bible was GOD's will and not that of men.I knew you were going to say that. That wasn’t my claim, I just quickly phrased it that way in order to differentiate Catholics from non-Catholics. That said, Catholic or non-Catholic, regardless of what denomination one belongs to, one still has to be saved, or else you’re just going through the motions, and that is not much different than a non-Christian. And my earlier point was that Jesus made it super clear, you must be born again. That is what salvation is!
This "saved" thing is part of your denomination, your specific theology in whatever Christian group you belong to. From what I've seen of the "saved" in the last few years, the entire thing is bogus since the "born agains" neither uphold the teachings of Jesus or seek to carry them out. It's some evangelical stuff led by frankie graham or focus on the family or somebody. It's your sect. Nobody else has to join it. It's not up to you to define the Christian faith.
I think that the country and the world might benefit from public readings of the Sermon on the Mount.
I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
! st birth -- One must be born and then 2nd birth --- baptized by the Holy Spirit.Can an orthodox or Catholic be a born again Christian?[
A person is born again by the baptismal waters. Since all Catholics and Orthodox are baptised then they are all already born again
Read this: Born Again – The Bible Way
The Scripture was inspired by the moving of the Holy Spirit upon the hearts of men. What became the Bible was GOD's will and not that of men.This "saved" thing is part of your denomination, your specific theology in whatever Christian group you belong to. From what I've seen of the "saved" in the last few years, the entire thing is bogus since the "born agains" neither uphold the teachings of Jesus or seek to carry them out. It's some evangelical stuff led by frankie graham or focus on the family or somebody. It's your sect. Nobody else has to join it. It's not up to you to define the Christian faith.
I think that the country and the world might benefit from public readings of the Sermon on the Mount.
I'm sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and demonstrably untrue. It has nothing to do with my "denomination"...The core teachings of Christianity, regardless of denomination, include salvation. You'd have to throw out most of the bible to claim salvation is not necessary.
As for the second thing you said, about the Sermon on the Mount, I completely agree.
But you insist on referencing "salvation" in terms of your own denomination. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. do it in all kinds of ways. I think that what you are really saying is that everyone must follow the leaders of your denomination, which apparently is a denomination that believes in biblical inerrancy and infallibility. You have no idea of what occurs in the minds of people of other denominations.
No, I'm not saying people should follow my denomination (I don't even have a denomination) but what I am saying is that all churches or denominations should teach what is biblical and what is in line with the actual truth, the true intent of God. Otherwise, what is the point?
THAT is what is important, and unfortunately most churches today don't do that. And when I say that, I'm not only talking about salvation and the Catholic church, I'm talking about other issues too.
The Creator did not write the bible. No one who actually wrote what became the various books of the bible had any contact with the Creator. No one can know the "true intent" of the Creator.
I just read a piece about frankie graham, who went to Jerusalem and babbled about his "end times" thing, making it sound before the world like he represented the American People, which was absolutely appalling, disgusting, and a disgrace to the American People. Stick to your cult, denomination, and your whatever.
Can a orthodox or catholic be a born again Christian?
I think they can if they have a personal relationship with christ and are born out of water and spirit. I have friends who are in free church and they told me a Catholic can be a christian if he has a personal relationship with christ. But not all catholics are christians. And we talked about the Pope and my friend said he is not sure if he is a christian I mean the Pope but that a Catholic can be christian.
