Are Catholics Christian?

Catholic Christianity has many different ways to G-d, by the intecession of saints who surround the throne of G-d and other ways too.

which is quite different than say Fundamentalist Christians of Protestant pursuasion who feel only the actual words of G-d, thru the printed verses, is the only way to G-ds salvation (God & Jesus the Christ being the same...
who is 'the creator' of the world)


Catholics and Protestants are two ends of the same stick.
It is only their interpetations, emphasis, of the complete & known writings
that are mildly different, It is only their church heirarchy and structures that are tolerably different to one another's acceptance of serving and praising the same G-d.

the Catholics state out in the open that they ar not charismatic---
they are an Apostolic church...filled with pomp and ritual... meant to create a mystical & trancendental experience that revitalizes the individual on a personal level.
If one were brought up as a 'holy roller' then the slow and ponderous and symbolic rites/rituals in a Catholic Mass would seem like a paganistic & magical Opera. To the Apostolic Christians the 'speaking-in-tongues' by the Charismatics et al is an 'unknown' and is seen as confusion... and we're all familiar with the admonition that ' the devil' is the author of confusion.

neither Catholics or Protestants follow anything like Buddah or Mohammad
they follow (to their own interpetation) the teachings of the Christ--- ergo Christians !


what did you milk this topic for?? 9 or 10 pages ? SheeZe !!!
[Oh, and thanks for the one (1) point award on this post...
i thought it would of been a minus five (-5) rating.]


[edit on 8-7-2008 by St Udio]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

:shk: The Catholic Church has 3 bible readings each Sunday mass and 2 bible readings during each daily mass. The ENTIRE bible is read in mass this way over a three year period. If you missed 'important verses' it was because you weren't there long enough to hear them read.

I MISSED them because the latin vulgate Bible didn't have them in there!

I missed them because I went to a dark dank gothic looking dungeonesque cathedral named "St. Mary's" where I dipped my fingers in holy water (what ever that is) where statues of crying woman and a man with his chest ripped open vertically at the sternum his heart falling out and blood dripping down his face from a bunch of barbed wire wrapped around his head.

BUT THERE IS MORE!

There was organ music sounding not unlike Phantom of the Opera and I got to kneel stand, kneel, stand, kneel, stand, kneel stand, kneel, stand for an hour while listening to a man that would later (30 years to be exact) be discovered to have fondled many of the boy that attended there!

He wore a naru black jacket and most of the mass was said in latin. I was 8 years old at the time and the place scared the bejeeziz out of me.

That is the first memory of that church.

I am a calvinist now and all that rant you give amounts to Jack SquaT!

This is why I said NOT to use the religion but what does the BIBLE say regarding who a Christian is.

The fact is ,, what I said is Correct and is supported by the Scriptures so what you are getting so damn indignant about I have NO idea.

The Bible is explicit about salvation and aint no intercession mentioned in the bible. When you die you go straight to judgement NOT purgatory. When you pray, you Pray to God or Jesus in Jesus name NOT MARY'S

I think the Catholics accepting evolution was the most asinine thing they ever did and they continue to do dumb things that make it harder for Christians everywhere.

The ignorance about the Catholic faith displayed here is sickening.

Were YOU at my church when I was growing up? Were you in the Schools they had where nuns could beat you sensless!! Yeah that is what I experienced and whether YOU think is ignorant or NOT doesn't change the FACTS they are true.

So next time you feel like talking like you think you know what you're talking about,,

TRY NOT to be so presumptuous


- Con


[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

reply to post by Rockpuck

Sooo what would the perfect Christian religion be then? Which denomination got it right?

It would be fun to say, mine.
This is a situation that is the opposite of the Catholic one.
Where the official version, in my denomination, gets it right, but it falls down at the individual level.
The official version goes something like: We are coming out of a long dark age.
Some groups made good progress, but were hunted down and exterminated, for having independent thought.
The Protestant Reformation was able to get enough people to rise up, all at the same time, to defend themselves.
The new churches advanced truth, but became victims of their own success.
We take the stand that we need to go back and review the Reformation material and see what stands up to examination.
Those truths should be a foundation for further development, and progress towards a better understanding to wards a perfect truth, that will take eternity to get right.
Meanwhile we must not be zealous for our own beliefs, in order to compel agreement.
We need to be humble and understand that we do not really know, for sure, everything involved in what the Bible is trying to tell us.

That is the official version but it falls down on a local level because of man's human nature, wanting to write a code that everyone has to follow.
My advice is to think independently. but work jointly.
We should respect other people's personal opinion, but seek a unity and brotherhood to stand up against the forces of evil, who wish to enslave us.

reply to post by St Udio

To the Apostolic Christians the 'speaking-in-tongues' by the Charismatics et al is an 'unknown' and is seen as confusion...

Have you ever heard of the Charismatic Renewal based on St. Frances of Assisi?
It was a big deal at the Catholic Church I went to.
They had their own Mass on Sunday afternoon.
They had regular meetings in the band room on the church property.
We did speak in tongues and prophesied.
Maybe this movement is not universal, but it was going along fine in California.
I mainly went to this because my girlfriend was totally into it, but I am a witness to the fact that there are Charismatics in the Catholic Church and are not only tolerated, but encouraged.

[edit on 8-7-2008 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by Conspiriology

Originally posted by FlyersFan

:shk: The Catholic Church has 3 bible readings each Sunday mass and 2 bible readings during each daily mass. The ENTIRE bible is read in mass this way over a three year period. If you missed 'important verses' it was because you weren't there long enough to hear them read.

I MISSED them because the latin vulgate Bible didn't have them in there!…So next time you feel like talking like you think you know what you're talking about…TRY NOT to be so presumptuous

Ha! Did you read all the posts here, Con? I was told that my statements about the Catholic Church being responsible for the Inquisition and other acts was my opinion!! That's what you're dealing with.

I wonder if FlyersFan ever heard of Wycliffe or Tyndale? Then again, I can't really blame him if he hadn't; I was never taught about them in Parochial School either.


[edit on 8-7-2008 by passenger]

[edit on 8-7-2008 by passenger]

[edit on 8-7-2008 by passenger]

I have heard it said that Christianity had two great enemies: St. Paul and St. Constantine. The first introduced that neoplatonic dislike of the material that still haunts Christians and the second destroyed the ability of the Church to continue to speak truth to power by, in fact, giving it power.

There is nothing that will kill a religious movement faster than assimilation.

reply to post by Rockpuck


Whats with the hostility? I post two definitions and you act as if I insulted you. I was trying show how origin deals with beginnings and nature deals with essence or type.

I never said Zoroastrianism was an ethnicity. I said it was a Persian religion, which it is. You implied in your post that Zoroastrians were semites. I am saying Zoroastrianism is not Semitic. It may of had some non Persian followers, but for the most part the religion was Persian and is still Persian.

What I said was not asinine, its a fact that Persians are not Semites and the vast majority of Zoroastrians were Persian and still are to this day. Even the Parsi in India are of Persian descent.

Speaking of asinine, Islam is closer in practice to Judaism than Christianity. There are no vast differences between the two. We both believe G-d is One. Halal is Kosher and vice versa for the most part. The only exceptions being alcohol and meat/dairy. Hebrew is very close to Arabic, so the wording is very close. We have Halakha and they have Sharia, the function of which is very similar. We both require circumcision. Idolatry and imagery is forbidden in both. Neither faith believes in "the Original Sin". There is a vast difference between Christianity and Judaism. Islam is a Semitic religion as well as Judaism is. The Arabs are Semites.

reply to post by salvu


Yes the Arabs are Semites and not only Semites, but Israel's brethren.
I posted a thread awhile back railing against Anti Arab propaganda, saying we are both the Children of Abraham.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


We're Semitic here in Malta as well. However as you may well know, anti-Semitism seems to be used to describe solely the sentiment against Jews. The media has changed its meaning.
I'm drawing a parallel here to Christianity. Whether or not today's so called Christian religions are Christian or not in dogma, the word has taken a traditional meaning that is hard to rebut.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I agree as well. The Charismatics are widely accepted within the Catholic Church and every parish has its own group here. I was never in their group though so I have no idea what they do. I am under the impression that most of the members are women.

reply to post by salvu


I may be mistaken but I think the source of this confusion comes from people in the late 1800s who hated Jews not just Judaism. The Roman Church for centuries promoted what was called an Anti Judaic belief. They didn't want to kill all Jews, they wanted all Jews to become good Catholics. Somewhere in the 1800s this changed with the rise of what was then called Anti Semitism. Various groups wanted not just the end of the faith, they wanted the people wiped out. Somehow in the middle of it all a bunch of people seemed to of forgotten that the Jews are just one small group of Semites.

I would say people could use Jewicide, but that apparently means a Jew who is so Jewish he commits suicide. Then there is Judaicide. I think the best would be Judeocide or Judeocidal.

Now if I can come up with a term that uses the prefix Mis, as in Misotheism or Misanthropy, to denote hatred towards Jews. Then I may have a more semantically correct term.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I am by no means a fan of Catholicism .. I have my own ...... issues ... with them. Personal issues.

But never will I ever say that they are not Christian. Nor would I say the various Protestant religions that I despise just as much, are not Christian. To me, anyone who believes in Christ, in any way shape or form, whether they act in his words or not... is a Christian. Good Christian, bad Christian .. it's all perception. God tells me, it is not my place to judge..

If you believe that God tells you to worship him in one way .. do it .. but don't judge others for not hearing the same words you have.. because regardless of dogma, religions, faiths and what a man in a funny hat says .. no two Humans have EVER thought the exact same concept of God.

He is ever changing, and all around us, infinite in nature with no concepts attached.. Catholics are Christian, and that is that .. Not for everyone, so be it, it wasn't for me .. I decided that long ago ..
i found my peace, my methods of worship .. and I never judge another soul for his. And neither should you.

passenger:

I was told that my statements about the Catholic Church being responsible for the Inquisition and other acts was my opinion!! That's what you're dealing with.

Actaully ..... it is ... here is why: The inquisition was not exactly.. sanctioned for Religious purposes..

It was.. in a sense, though two different time periods, no different then the Cathars. The Church didn't have a "problem" with them per se, actually, they never once caused a problem in the Christian world.. they simply followed the Gnostic (original) way of Christs teachings..

but the Church slaughtered them...

A Crusade in Southern France.. never learned in school, of course, much like the Child Crusade, but it happened.. The Knight Templar where ordered to slay thousands of Cathars. They refused, even helped many escape the French soldiers..

Religion ...... is power. When rightly controlled.. Which the Church was excellent at. Not so much now, they are defunct with their liberal views.. but once, they where the strongest central governing force in the World.. anyone who opposed them or caused "problems" .. suffered the results. The Inquisition was, essentially, a political move.. not a religious one.

Just like in the Muslim world.. Islam is abused like Catholicism was to create anger and hatred to cause crimes .. still a beautiful religion, it was never meant for that purpose.. but we must distinguish Religion from Politics..

Often intertwined.

driley:

St. Paule, from what History tells us, was a notorious Womanizer .. a strong supporter of the Roman Patriarch.

MikeboydUS:

There was, quite simply, no point in saying what you did.. as I already said it, you obviously thought me wrong?

Persians are not Semites and the vast majority of Zoroastrians were Persian and still are to this day.

The "majority" where, perhaps, it is unknown.. however, if you actually STUDY the religion, the aspects between the two, between that and Christianity, mixed with Judaism, clearly resembles Zoroastrianism ..

The majority today are Armenian, which is a hybrid mix of Human genetics.. not quite Persian, not quite Semitic, not quite Caucasian either...

The Scientific term for Armenians is: Trans-Caucasia

Islam is closer in practice to Judaism than Christianity.

Islam, a religion based of Arab cultures in the lower Arab peninsula, is actually closer to the localized Arab "Pagan" religions and cultures then Judaism.

Granted, both where influenced by Egypt, Judaism and the Arab Pagan religious where vastly different.. Christianity was MEANT to be identical to Judaism, as it is a DIRECT off take.. where as Islam is a COMPLETE MAKE OVER of one religion ..

All because one man named Muhammad dreamed of power.. and nothing more.

The only exceptions being alcohol and meat/dairy.

A Product of two different plauges from two different regions. Why don't Muslims like Dogs? ..... Same reason Jews don't eat Pork.

Hebrew is very close to Arabic

Has nothing to do with religion? .. Romanian is the closest and most pure form of Modern Latin .. all French, Spanish, Italian come from the same tree.. as does English, German and ancient Saxonian .. Scandinavian .. then there is the Gaelic Lanugage tree..

Hebrew and Arabic are of the same language tree.

We both require circumcision.

A commonality that was, most likely, taken from a "more advanced" civilization .. a form of hygiene if you will...

Idolatry and imagery is forbidden in both. Neither faith believes in "the Original Sin".

True, but very, very minor.. and cannot relate to RELIGION .. as they are BOTH CULTURAL in relation .. not Religious.

Muhammad also based all of his supposed "beliefs" off Judaism alone, not Christianity.. both from the same tree, two different branches in two different directions.....

Islam is a Semitic religion as well as Judaism is. The Arabs are Semites.

Arabs are Semites in only one sense.. Semites are a cross of Caucasian and Asian .. Arabs however are far more Asian and African then traditional Semites like Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews

Genetically the same, in a sense, as much as the Irish with pale skin and raven black hair where the same as Scandinavians with blond hair and Latin Blocs with dark skin and brown hair...

the CULTURE is what mattered. Not ethnicity.

Originally posted by Rockpuck

True, but very, very minor.. and cannot relate to RELIGION .. as they are BOTH CULTURAL in relation .. not Religious.

If you're going to say they are cultural then I think you might want to find another word for it because cultural IS religious and gets its meaning from the word "Cult" this is why it is said religion with its philosophical ideology is what brought about the cultural society

Also you seem to be contradicting yourself here or am I not missing somethnig. When you say the inquisition wasn't religiously motivated but in the same breath seem to be saying religion ran politics and again affirm that understanding by making your own feelings known about not having religion in politics.

- Con

Originally posted by driley
I have heard it said that Christianity had two great enemies: St. Paul and St. Constantine.

Boy is that hitting two nails on the head! Succinct and to the point. Wish I could do that.

To further that, I’ve always agreed with the assertion that the Romans actually killed Christ twice: Pilate killed Him in body and Paul (Roman mole) killed His teachings. I guess you could add Constantine into that as killing His plans for what would become of His ‘Church’.

reply to post by Conspiriology


I tell you mate, I am so effing sick of idiots.

Culture, from LATIN, meaning to Cultivate.

Cultera.

It only reference Human activity amongst a select group of humans who's social structure is consistent over the entire population ..

Cult simply refers to Religious Veneration. It comes from the Latin Cultus .. which indirectly translate into English as something like Care or perhaps Adore, adoration or even Worship in some extreme cases...

A culture can have several religions, though unwise.. a Cult has nothing what so ever to do with culture...

You cannot take the prefix of one word and try and relate it to another English word. You only make your self "appear" stupid. Which ironically this only bit of fact seems to be the only true thing in your vile pile of excrement.

When you say the inquisition wasn't religiously motivated but in the same breath seem to be saying religion ran politics and again affirm that understanding by making your own feelings known about not having religion in politics.

From your fist paragraph, I will only assume you are simply simplistic .. so I will TRY and explain better for you.

The inquisition was about as "religious" as the Palestinians who lob rockets into Israel...

Religion is used as a cover to control the weak minded.. those to ignorant to understand truths.. that the only way to eternity if not through controlled Dogma but through self understanding..

The Church, as a POLITICAL entity, would entice such actions.. such as the Crusades, which where Political to take advantage of the Religious.. but the Church and the Religion are different.. just as any Government can regulate it's people, it does not represent the actual foundation in which the people live by....



[edit on 7/8/2008 by Rockpuck]

reply to post by passenger


There is no actual evidence that Paul --- if he even existed -- had ANYTHING to do with the foundation of the Church..

Christianity, in Rome, which sparked the religious revolution .. eventually anyways .. was actually begun by WOMEN in the Catacombs of Rome...

Paul .. Peter .. any other character having nothing to do with it..

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Catholics should have their own dictionary. Even their definition of Paganism is skewed.

reply to post by Rockpuck


You’re starting to give off the odor of ‘A-Smug-Person-Who-Thinks-Their-Ideas-are-All-Correct-and-Everyone-Else-is-Wrong-Just-Because-You-Say-So’.

You argue with Conspiriology about semantics (in which case I side with him) and then try to rip apart my post, wherein I mentioned Paul, with this:

Originally posted by Rockpuck
There is no actual evidence that Paul --- if he even existed -- had ANYTHING to do with the foundation of the Church…Christianity, in Rome, which sparked the religious revolution .. eventually anyways .. was actually begun by WOMEN in the Catacombs of Rome...

You instantly dismiss the idea that Paul had anything to do with Christianity - mock it - but then make an unsubstantiated claim that “women” did it! Based on what? Your opinion? Where’s your proof of this? Sitting there all smug and making proclamations of ‘facts’ and ‘truth’ according to you doesn’t end the debate in your favor. In fact, you’re heading into the dangerous jungle of Just Making Stuff Up. Don’t expect us to blindly follow you there without questioning it.

reply to post by passenger


And you are starting .. no wait.. you already do, sound like the typical ATS'er with a 8th grade education.

It happens, that I speak Latin .. and I know Latin vocabulary.. and I know that it is actually a fact that Culture and Cult are two different words, with two different meanings, that have absolutely nothing in common with each other be it prefix or suffix.

Now if me being a bit more intelligent then you hurts your feelings, I don't give a damn.

You argue with Conspiriology about semantics

Linguistic facts actually.

but then make an unsubstantiated claim that “women” did it! Based on what? Your opinion?

Unlike you..... and many others.. I just so happened to have spent years studying both the Middle East's history in politics and economics.. this lead to various other topics. Such as the rise and fall of Christianity..

www.pbs.org... s.html

It would be obvious to any half witted man that a religion outlawed could not practice in the open. No churches for Christ. Where did they go? Sewers. Catacombs. Dungeons..

www.scrollpublishing.com...

While this study does not intend on Christianity in general, notice how women are drawn into the walls inside the Catacombs.. odd seeing as Rome was a Patriarch .. many believe Women upheld the religion via Jewish Matriarch traditions.. even though being a priest was not a womens job, to be idolized it would appear in Rome, in the underground, these maternal figures held special significance.

A simple Google search will give you plenty of books to read.. I have several on the topic in my own library.

Don’t expect us to blindly follow you there without questioning it.

No no, with your intelligence it would take something ignorant and moronic for you to follow...

Originally posted by Rockpuck


I tell you mate, I am so effing sick of idiots.

Culture, from LATIN, meaning to Cultivate.

Umm,, did I offend you? Have I said anything at all that gave you the impression I would be such an idiot as to go off ballistic because my need to be right was in such jeopardy, I just can't stand being corrected because I have such toxic shame attached to being wrong that I call people "effing idiots" ?

That IS what you are calling me isn't it Rockpunk?

If I have made a mistake about my understanding of the origin and meaning of the word culture, simply suggesting I may be is all one usually has to do. I have no problems with apologizing and none forgiving so you will forgive my getting defensive in this post.

I usually get that way when I am being attacked.

This is more awkward for me however as I have always admired your posts and have sent you u2u's praising them.

This one however ,, YOU got comin to ya and I normally settle for just having seen their foot in ther mouth but lately it seems it requires an entire shoe store!

When we talk of freedom it should be practiced. Of course, in common law the factor of a physically injured party is best evidence (we can see it with our own eyes). Now the mental trauma now goes to the boards for discussion because it is intangible. The word "cult" comes from "culture" and has a negative social connotation. Yet any group could be a cult since they are a collective culture
wiki.answers.com...

Guess ther are a lot of effing idiots out there huh rockpunk

Need some more ???

I think a good lesson in humility is what you need but that's besides the point so Ill continue to shove the shoe leather
en.wikipedia.org...(religion)

Now smart guy what is it Religion does?

IT CULTIVATES!

You cannot take the prefix of one word and try and relate it to another English word.

Thats the wonderful thing about english son, YOU CERTAINLY CAN and that is EXACTLY what YOU DID!

You only make your self "appear" stupid. Which ironically this only bit of fact seems to be the only true thing in your vile pile of excrement.

My vile pile of excrement? Ever consider charm school? The only pile of BS that is stinking up the thread is yours. I didn't say anything to you to deserve such personal insults. Is your ego so fragile? your mental abilities so superior to anyone elses?

Nope but I got ta say,, I sure would feel like an idiot if I were you. For someone to say I am making myself look stupid because you think you know what you are talking about and turns out

YOU DON'T!

- Con
PS; don't forget to take the dirty socks out of the shoes before ya shove em in your mouth Rockpunk


Here learn something! www.acts1711.com...

[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]