Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

I Believe

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
fLYbUDDY said:
I see a differance in the definitions

True, they are 2 different words, but definition #2 of catholic identifies them as belonging to the universal Christian church. Catholics follow the teachings of the Bible, believe in Christ, pray to christ, and believe in the holy trinity. Wouldn't you agree that those are criteria for being a Christian too?
 
True, they are 2 different words, but definition #2 of catholic identifies them as belonging to the universal Christian church. Catholics follow the teachings of the Bible, believe in Christ, pray to christ, and believe in the holy trinity. Wouldn't you agree that those are criteria for being a Christian too?

Yeah you are correct and I obviously believe what the definition says. And yes they "claim” to be associated (or belonging to) the universal Christian church. They are. That doesn't make them a true Christian though. They are a specific group of Christians who practice and believe things that are not always Biblical. Does that mean I think Jesus can't be found in Catholic? No, I'm sure there are some Catholics that agree on the big picture, Jesus is Lord of Lords and it is He that completes the relationship between God and man. But most of the Catholic Church has distorted what the Bible says about other really important areas of the Word. They practice an organized religion. Christianity shouldn't be an organized religion with a bunch of routine and no passion. It should be an active and alive relationship with the Most High. If you want to know some specifics of the split in views then ask but there are just too many to get into it if you really don't care.

BTW--I don't know how they are such a big denomination. It amazes me how people sit through those really dry "masses.
":D
 
Catholic is the religion.... "c"atholic is the belief in the Trinity. Big "C" vs. small "c". All Christians are catholic with a little "c", not the big "C".
 
If Catholics followed the teachings of the Bible, they WOULD be Christians. They do NOT.

Nowhere in the Bible is a provision for a Pope, an intermidiary between believer and God, praying to the mother of Christ, or a provision for the veneration of special humans who are "elected" to sainthood. All believers are the saints.

In other words, Catholics are similar to Christians, but they are not specifically "Christian". They have made a unique religion based loosely around Christianity.
 
Nowhere in the Bible is a provision for a Pope, an intermidiary between believer and God, praying to the mother of Christ, or a provision for the veneration of special humans who are "elected" to sainthood. All believers are the saints.


Those are some examples of the specifics I asked if you wanted to know about skyking.

Good job Timebuilder!

And Skyboss you rock as well!!!
 
skyking1976 said:
Catholics are Christians according to these definitions...

Hence the replacement of "holy catholic church" with "Holy Christian Church" church in all creeds in "Non-Catholic" hymnals.

Protestant faiths have had to take some very drastic measures to separate themselves from the "Catholic" church. Just ask Martin Luther, he was the first guy to piss off the pope. :cool:
 
fLYbUDDY said:

BTW--I don't know how they are such a big denomination. It amazes me how people sit through those really dry "masses.
":D

You don't! Sit, Stand, Kneel, Sit, Stand, Kneel, Eat Cracker, Drink Wine, Sit, Kneel, Stand.....

I was raised Catholic and I can offer insight as to that side of the equasion. However, I haven't practiced for several years though. I haven't subscribed to that particular doctrine ever since I became "enlightened".
 
You one of them dancing Baptists? I'm one them singing Lutherans.

No I attend a very middle of the road church with a simple philosophy. Teach the word of God. It is Calvary Chapel and they fall under the denomination of being "non-denominational.” However those denominations you mentioned are wonderful groups of true Christians. Our pastor was going over something similar this past weekend. He was talking about how it was important to be the way God made you, with the individualism you have (in balance of course.) And your mission/fellowship is able to be used through how God made you. He gave an example of a church down the street, I think a Baptist church. He was saying how he and that pastor over at the other church were good friends and not viewed by each other as "holy" competition. Our pastor was admitting the he (our pastor) was a mellow guy and had a certain way of delivering the message. He said some of you might think I am rather boring and he says people have told him that. He said it doesn't offend him because he knows where there is a really loud very dramatic with a choir and all-type of church, and he refers them there. To the Baptist church down the street. Basically when it comes to those denominations that use the literal Bible as basis of doctrine then we are all the same immediate family of God, the different churches are just there to reach/provide for the different tastes that exist. Isn't the Lord so AWESOME!!!! I could sing of His LOVE forever!
 
Timebuilder said:
If Catholics followed the teachings of the Bible, they WOULD be Christians. They do NOT.

HUH?

Nowhere in the Bible is a provision for a Pope, an intermidiary between believer and God QUOTE]

Can you say: "Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church"?
 
Sure, I can say that. It has zero to do with the position of pope, since that is a church position, and not a Biblical position.

The Catholic church did not exist until the emperor Constantine had a vision and decided to join the early Christian believers, which were quickly growing in number, with the many pagan beliefs that had traditionally been a part of his sphere of influence.

The result of this was a church that was not at all Biblical and only vaguely related to Christianity. Somewhere along the way, it bacame a cutom to pray to others besides the Lord, such as his mother and a potpourri of "saints", which is a part of the pagan influence that was carried in by Constantine.
 
Timebuilder said:
The result of this was a church that was not at all Biblical and only vaguely related to Christianity. Somewhere along the way, it bacame a cutom to pray to others besides the Lord, such as his mother and a potpourri of "saints", which is a part of the pagan influence that was carried in by Constantine.

You know, Timebuilder, that I have enormous respect for you, but in this case you are making a distinction that is outrageous and self serving.

Baptists sing to instrumental music so Church of Christers say that's not acceptable and their praise never reaches the ears of god.

Lutherans, Catholics, Mormons, Orthodox.... the reasons that they are different is that each one thinks the other is wrong in some way.

Timebuilder, they are all Christains. If in order not to have to argue that Christians throughout western history have resisted science and progress (my comment on this subject started this thread migration) you clasify everyone on the planet other than you as "not REALLY a Christian," fine. But this is specious, and you know it is.

Sorry, sir. I trully do not mean to be offensive, but your position is infinitely regressive.
 
you clasify everyone on the planet other than you as "not REALLY a Christian," fine. But this is specious, and you know it is.

That is not a distiction that I am making as much as I am observing the clarity that the Bible makes in what constitutes a follower of Christ, and therfore, a Christian, by definition.

Matthew 6:7 says: "And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words." If this is not a prophetic admonition to the use of "our father" and "hail, Mary", then I don't know what is.


I have no idea of what divisions are made between Lutherans and Baptists. Really, I don't give a hoot if they sing or not. I CAN tell you this: the Bible specifies that we should "make a joyful noise unto the Lord" and we are to "enter into His gates with singing, and into His courts with praise".

I think you belive that it is I who is making the distinction, and that is not the case. The Bible is the source, the POH, CFR and AIM for our relationship to God as followers of Christ. If you stray from the instruction with intent, then can you say that you are following His way?

No, you can't.
 
Last edited:
Uh, Timebuilder, with all due respect, I don't think comparing the Bible to a POH is valid. My POH was written in English, and if necessary I can find the guy who wrote it, tap him on the shoulder, and ask "hey, what'd you mean by this?" It's not easy to do that with the Bible.

I concede that God might exist, but I can't agree with you about the Bible. It is, in essence, a book of parables, fables, and memoirs. It's a an important piece of literature, but it's no more divine than Jonathan Livingston Seagull. (Which is a pretty good book about religion, by the way.) I know the Bible says it's the word of God. I can also tell you I'm really John Travolta. That doesn't make it true.

Someone suggested that you can tell it's the word of God because of the way it cuts into people's souls when they read it. But that doesn't happen to everybody. Are those who are unmoved by the Bible contaminated or "cursed" in some way? Is the "word of God" so feeble that it can't break through that contamination?
 
Catholics/Evangelicals

I found this book a few years ago that has helped me greatly understand the differences between what Evangelicals and Catholics believe:

It's simply called

Roman Catholics and Evangelicals, Agreements and Differences
written by Norman Geisler and Ralph MacKenzie.
 
My POH was written in English, and if necessary I can find the guy who wrote it...

...and I can find the guy who wrote the Bible. I just pray. The answer may be a great deal more clear than asking an inspector to interpret a reg, too!! :D


but it's no more divine than Jonathan Livingston Seagull.

Onece again, I can't give you proof. I can only remind you of 2Timothy, 3:16-17.



I can also tell you I'm really John Travolta. That doesn't make it true.

If you really were John Travolta, then it WOULD be true, wouldn't it?



Someone suggested that you can tell it's the word of God because of the way it cuts into people's souls when they read it. But that doesn't happen to everybody. Are those who are unmoved by the Bible contaminated or "cursed" in some way? Is the "word of God" so feeble that it can't break through that contamination?

Feeble? Ahem. No, it is not feeble.

As explained, the idea is not for God to FORCE everyone to be a believer. It's a choice that he offers to everyone, but He already knows not everyone will take His offer. He wants people to open their hearts to Him, and follow His way. In order for everyone to know about His free offer of salvation, He directs the believers to spread the word. Some will follow, and others will not. If you desire to follow Him, open your heart and ASK Him. For many, this doeasn't happen until something really important or traumatic happens in their lives, and then they finally seek God.

He will not club someone over the head to MAKE them believe.
 
Last edited:
Timebuilder, I'm curious: how do you feel about the Book of Mormon? (Bear in mind I know nothing about it myself.) A significant number of people consider it to be just as valid as the Bible. What do you think?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top