| Author | Message | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1504 Registered: 7-2004  |
At the risk of simply moving the same debate from one thread to another, I would like to address this from a different angle. And rather than list what I think is wrong with the Catholic church, I would like to propose a few reasons why I believe that they are more Christian than SDAism. RCC affirms the Biblical Triune God, SDA rejects this. While both RCC and SDAism have sources of authority beyond the Bible alone, at least the RCC doesn't re-write the entire Scripture in order to insert their teaching directly into Scripture as the SDAs have with the Clear Word. RCC is direct and open about their beliefs, they don't pretend to be someone they aren't in order to trick people into joining. RCC shows a consistent concern for human life and against social injustice (which seems consistent with much that I have read from the OT Prophets); while SDAism can boast plenty of good works it certainly can't point to either of these themes. And before I get flooded with responses, I am not suggesting that these few things make everything else about Catholicism acceptable. I merely think it is worth stepping back from the "evil incarnate" viewpoint we were taught in SDAism and examine this from a different perspective. 1 Pet 2:9 extends the Priesthood beyond Christ to all believers. I'm not saying this makes the RCC priesthood the correct Biblical model, I simply want to dispel the myth that teaching a priesthood among believers is a denial of Christ's priesthood. Just as we reign with Christ (Eph 2:6) without detracting from Him being our King, we serve with Him as priests without distracting from Him being our High Priest. Confessing sins, not just to God, but to others as well is also Biblical (James 5:16). Now before anyone jumps in to tell me all the reasons why RCC shouldn't be considered truly Christian, please first address the premise of the OP. Do you agree or disagree that RCC is at least a step in the right direction from SDAism. | ||
| Mjcmcook Registered user Username: Mjcmcook Post Number: 334 Registered: 2-2011 |
~Ric-b~ Regarding the Catholic belief in the "concern for human life" which they believe begins with conception~(they must have read that in Psalm chapter 139)~ if the majority of Protestant churches had been 'on board' with this belief in the 1970's, most probably the 'Roe/Wade' would NOT be the 'law of the land' at this time~ I was an sda in the 1970's~ I was not taught the truth of Psalm, chapter 139~ I think to this day, that is not a major concern of the sda belief system~ What I am trying to say is~ the RCC has a key belief that I respect and now uphold~ I think some Protestants do believe this also; however, I wonder how many? One last thought~ While the RCC is standing in the "gap"for the 'unborn'~the sda's are standing up for the IJ ! Does anyone else think there is something wrong with this picture?! ~mj~ | ||
| Jonvil Registered user Username: Jonvil Post Number: 654 Registered: 4-2007 |
I agree, the RCC is the best of a bad lot. If I were forced to choose between the SDAC and the RCC, the RCC would win hands down. | ||
| Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie Post Number: 859 Registered: 1-2007 |
Jonvil, I grew up in a neighborhood of Italian catholics and learned alot about the church from them. I would not pick either one. I would much rather stay home and study Gods' word. Gail | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1770 Registered: 12-2007  |
I am thankful there are MANY others to choose from.  | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1508 Registered: 7-2004 |
Me too, Francie. But there are a couple of points I am trying to make with this post. | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1772 Registered: 12-2007 |
Carry on | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13333 Registered: 12-2003  |
I also believe the Catholic Church teaches a false gospel—one that actually resembles the Adventist "gospel" in its soteriology (but not in its underlying tenets). The thing about the Catholic church is that it does retain, as Rick as said, is orthodox statements of belief re: the Trinity. If you think of the church as a tree growing out of the root of apostolic teaching, the Catholic church did originiate from that root. If there had been nothing worth "saving", there could not have been a Reformation. To be sure, the Reformation brought about Protestantism that has formed a whole huge branch that is still rooted in that original apostolic root. Catholicism also is a branch rooted in that same foundation, but its branch hardly resembles biblical Christianity anymore. Nevertheless, it does share a root with Christianity. That's why we CAN find a true statement of the nature and identity of God. Adventism and the cults, in contrast, are completely different plants. They do not share a root of apostolic teaching; they have a different god completely. They have grown branches that closely resemble the branches of the Christian tree on the surface, so when "Christian cultists" mingle with Christian (or Cahtolics, even), one can't always tell the difference at first. But if you trace those branches back down to their trunks and root systems, you'll find that they are "bushes" that have grown up in the shade of the Christian church, but they have NO biblical truth . They have a completely different rooty system. I would never steer a person to the Catholic Church...but the cults are completely different organisms than are the Church and the Catholic church because they started from different roots. Catholicism, in the historic sense, has something to reform; the cults have nothing to reform. They can only be abandoned. Colleen | ||
| Starlabs Registered user Username: Starlabs Post Number: 28 Registered: 5-2011 |
Comparing 2 cults and deciding which is worse? Ok. Why? | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1510 Registered: 7-2004 |
Starlabs, if you review what Colleen covered in her post you will have a very good sense of why I started this thread. I believe that there are serious errors within RCism; however, the nature of RCism is substantially different from that of SDAism. Additionally, I think it helps to illustrate just how far SDAism is from Biblical Christianity when it is compared and contrasted to other systems that transitioning and Former SDAs generally consider false. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 2350 Registered: 7-2007 |
RCC is a step in the same direction as SDA - away from God. Yes, they believe in the triune God, but, like SDAism, they have the wrong "jesus." No, they don't rewrite the Bible, they just teach people their tradition instead of encouraging people to study the Bible. Jesus said: "In vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men." Matthew 15:9. While it's good that Catholicism is against abortion, they killed many, many people in the inquistition and the crusades. The RCC priesthood usurps Jesus' priesthood because it requires their people to confess to an ordained priest, not just any believer - but more importantly, their people are taught that they CAN'T BE FORGIVEN unless they confess to a priest! (A real Christian knows that ALL his sins; past, present and future have all been forgiven.) Since we're talking about cults, how about one that is even less "Christian" than either RCC or SDA, though with a FALSE CHRIST, none of those are Christian at all. I'm talking here about one that teaches that God the Father used to be a mortal who worked his way to godhood, like his father and his father before him. The cult I'm referring to teaches that God the Father had carnal relations with a multitude of wives - enough to make many many spirit babies (angels) who in turn are born into human bodies. (That's why the teach that people should have a lot of children - to provide bodies for those spirits.) They teach that God had carnal relations with Mary (in the same way as a human husband with a wife), for Jesus to be born. The religion I'm talking about is LDS, the Mormons. Whether a lie is 99% true or whether it's 20% true, it's still a lie. The worst lie is the one that's the most believable. Now ALL these religions are just as deadly, one as much as another. Why join any of them and strive your whole life to obtain salvation and end up going to hell for eternity; when salvation is a FREE GIFT for the asking and you can live with God for eternity? | ||
| Starlabs Registered user Username: Starlabs Post Number: 29 Registered: 5-2011 |
I can see where Asurprise is coming from. There are certainly worse cults than SDA or RCC. I think just take the ministry you have in question such as SDA or RCC and compare it to the only standard you can, the Bible. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1513 Registered: 7-2004 |
Yes, Asurprise I have heard your repeated emphasis on the right on wrong Jesus based on finished atonement. I think you fail to recognize the critical importance of the Triune God. Anyone who does not acknowledge that God is truly One, is denying Scripture and the God found in Scripture. This aspect of God's nature is so important that God repeats this Truth over and over again in Scripture. I think you also fail to recognize just how serious it is to change the Word of God to fit your own teachings. Telling believers that they must follow commands and traditions not found in Scripture is wrong, but it isn't nearly as serious as re-writing God's Word to include your man-made commands and traditions. As Colleen pointed out, RCism retains some of the basic foundations of Christianity while SDAism (and Mormonism) reject even these foundations. I pointed out earlier that I believed it was important to our credibility that we challenge the same errors outside of SDAism that we are critical of inside of SDAism. But it is also important to our credibility that we accurately distinguish between errors rather than lumping everything together. For instance, your repeated comment that RCs and SDAs both believe in an unfinished atonement is, I believe, a confusion of the issue. The issue of transubstantiation has little, if anything, in common with the idea of the IJ. I have never heard that RCism teaches God granting provisional forgiveness that can later be revoked. | ||
| Starlabs Registered user Username: Starlabs Post Number: 30 Registered: 5-2011 |
Well if the Trinity is where you feel SDA's fall short and RCC's don't I'd have to disagree. Take a look at this. I'm taking this from a website. Does Mary, the mother of Jesus, play a role in the salvation of mankind?: "Taken up to heaven she (Mary) did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation..." Pg. 252, #969 "Being obedient she (Mary) became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race." Pg. 125, #494 Is this doctrine scriptural? According to God's Word, Mary has never had anything to do with the salvation process. Scripture reveals that Jesus is the ONLY One who can provide salvation: "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12 Jesus Himself declared that He is the ONLY way to heaven: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved... " John 10:9 Still the Catechism insists: "She (Mary) is inseparably linked with the saving work of her Son." Pg. 303, #1172 The caption to this read that Catholics are putting Mary into the Trinity. So I'd say they don't believe in the Trinity either. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1516 Registered: 7-2004 |
Catholics have given Mary a position and power that is not in accordance with Scripture. But no Catholic I have ever met has confused Mary with being God. Is it the caption from the catechism, or from the website that says Catholics are putting Mary into the Trinity? Just because a website has claimed something, I wouldn't conclude it is accurate without some fact checks. I have read RC descriptions of their beliefs. I have read well researched critics of RCism. I have yet to see evidence that RCC denies or perverts the Trinity. | ||
| Truman Registered user Username: Truman Post Number: 13 Registered: 1-2012 |
I think there is value in making this comparison (SDA vs. RC), for this reason: As SDAs, we were taught by E. White's writings that the RCC was "The Beast", and would one day reign Sunday law terror down upon our poor remnant church. Hmm...it turns out that evil RCC's theology was closer to the true gospel. Now who is The Beast? (Uh, that's a rhetorical question...) While it's hard for me to understand how Catholic members buy into all the extra-biblical material (e.g., who are you calling "Holy Father"?), SDAs have even more extra-biblical, and yes, contra-biblical "stuff." | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7632 Registered: 9-2006  |
I am no advocate of Catholicism contrary to what it may appear. However I understand their outlook somewhat. The Catholic/Eastern Orthodox allow the church to decide doctrine, so they look as us just as blingy as we look at them. They say, at least the church agrees with itself. I agree with Rick and also Colleen. I'll tell you another thing that I consider far worse than RCC doctrine and that is cessation-ism which is wide spread among the protestants. I consider it far worse because it is so simple, tell the gospel, just pull its teeth and render it harmless. I'll defend Adventists on that score, at least they don't do that. Least not the Adventists I know and neither do the Catholics. River | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7633 Registered: 9-2006 |
Quote: Do you agree or disagree that RCC is at least a step in the right direction from SDAism. I would have to disagree. River | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1518 Registered: 7-2004 |
SDAs may not TECHNICALLY be cessationists, but most do not believe that Spiritual Gifts extend beyond Ellen. What I find particularly offensive, and it is commonplace in the church, is that paper and pencil tests might tell you what Spiritual "gift" you have. I think it is nothing more than a quick way to recruit church volunteers and has little, if anything, to do with gifts of the Spirit. | ||
| Starlabs Registered user Username: Starlabs Post Number: 31 Registered: 5-2011 |
I had seen the above that I posted on a website and you are right Ric_b about fact checking. I'm just not as familiar with the RCC to be able to conclude if SDA or RCC is worse so I should have just stated that at the beginning. The movement that I feel is worse than RCC is the emergent movement, word of faith, prosperity gospel. Several names for the same overall movement. This movement brings in New Age aspects and truly teaches a different Jesus. And I see tendencies of this in SDA. As per an example, the Oakwood College had invited TD Jakes to speak and then rescinded the invitation because of his Sabbath ideas but it didn't sound like because of his word of faith ideas. Scary stuff going on in the evangelical churches today. The gift of discernment is really needed. |
