VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:19:23 10/11/99 Mon
Author: fate_777
Subject: Re: Southern Baptist Anti-Catholic!
In reply to: Gabriel 's message, "Southern Baptist Anti-Catholic!" on 15:49:05 10/11/99 Mon

> > The best denomination is now represented through an
> > official Website. The Southern Baptist Convention is
> > at: www.sbc.net
> > There are good theological and organizational
> > materials which compete with some of the Catholic
> > sites on the link. Of course, the theology is
> > different in type. I visit this site to my
> blessing.
> > Some of you are Baptist, and others may be interested
> > in investigating. Bye,
> > Daniel Pazos
>
> I don't know how many Protestants agree with what is
> written above, but as a Catholic, I think it is two
> things: A ridicuolously unfounded post, and a blatent
> charge against Catholics (anti-Catholicism). So, Mr.
> Pazos, let's see if your "best denomination" can
> justify the following challenges:

That really upsets me when people and not just baptists say that they are the best denomination, then someone else counters with ours is the best denomitnation, wouldnt it be better to be out trying to be a witness and a follower of christ rather than arguing over which denomination is the best?
fate(by the way i will put my name under what i respond to so theres no confusion :)
>
> 1) Southern Baptists claim that the Bible is the sole
> and final authority for the Christian. Where in the
> Bible does it say that the Bible is the SOLE
> authrority for the Christian?

I would agree on this point that no where does it say it is the only authority
fate
>
> 2) Southern Baptists claim that salvation is by faith
> alone. James 2:24 explicitly condemns this view: "We
> are justified by works, and not by faith alone" as
> does Phillipians 2:12, Romans 2:6-8, Romans 2:14,
> Matthew 25:31-46, Galatians 6:6-10, James 2:26, James
> 2:14, Luke 12:37, Hebrews 12:14, and 1 Timothy
> 6:18-19. So, give me one place in the Bible, just one
> single place, where it specifically says that we are
> justified by faith ALONE. In fact, give me a single
> verse where the phrase "only faith" or "faith alone"
> or anything of the sort can be found.

while I agree on this point you cant argue that the thief on the cross was saved by anything but grace alone, as he obviously had no chance to do good works, but I think grace, plus good works is the key not one without the other
fate
>
> 3) You claim that the Bible is the only authority, and
> so you reject the Church (including the successor of
> Peter-- the pope) and Tradition as true authorities.
> How do you reconcile this preposterous belief with 1
> Timothy 3:15, Matthew 16:17-20, John 21:15-17,
> Epehsians 5:27, 2 Thess 2:15, and 2 Timothy 2:2?

I must agree on this point as well
fate


> 4) Considering the fact that it was the Catholic
> Church, in the year 382, that defined the canon of
> Scriptures, and you don't believe that the Catholic
> Church is infallible, how do you know for sure that
> you even have an infallible Bible? Afterall, nobody
> knew the true canon before 382-- people referred
> constantly to books like the Gospel of Peter, the Book
> of Mary, etc.. Many people rejected 3rd John,
> Revelation, Philemon and other inspired books as well.
> Until the Catholic Church defined the canon, nobody
> knew what books to include in their Bibles. And yet
> you, as a Southern Baptist, still choose to read the
> New Testament that the CATHOLIC CHURCH compiled? Why?
> How do you know that your New Testament is infallible?


I must admit i do not know much about that so I cant really say
fate



>
> 5) The Southern Baptist church holds that the Church
> which Christ established was merely a body of
> believers and that every single Christian is within
> the Church. And yet this so-called "Church" is split
> into 26,000 denominations (literally!). And yet the
> Bible has blatently pointed out that the Church is
> completely unified: John 17:20-23, Acts 2:44, 1
> Corinthians 12:25-26, and Romans 12:4-5, along with
> every verse which refers to a singular Church. How do
> you dare to say that Christ's Church is split up into
> 26,000 schsims?


That is true too kinda hard to believe they have 26,000 shsicms WOW
fate
>
> 6) Southern Baptists hold that the Eucharist is merely
> a symbol of the blood and body of Jesus Christ. But
> Christ said, "This is my body... this is my blood"
> (Mat 26:26,28). And to eliminate confusion, he made a
> very obvious, blatent, and undeniable statement
> concerning the real presence: "My flesh is truly food,
> and my blood is truly drink." (John 6:55). Even Paul
> understood the Real Presence: "For as often as you eat
> this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's
> death till He comes. Therefore, whoever eats this
> bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy
> manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the
> Lord....For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy
> manner eats and drinks judgement to himself, not
> discerning the Lord's body."(1 Cor
> 11:26-27,29). The Real Presence is obvious. Where in
> the Bible do you find that the Eaucharist is meant to
> be symbolic?

Ok I am assuming that by this you mean they dont actually take communion, if this is the case, I must say I think that is wrong, I think like you said that we should eat the bread and the juice as rememberances of christs body and blood shed for us, if thats not what you meant then Im sorry
fate


>
> 7) Southern Baptists don't anoint the sick with oil.
> How do you justify this with James 5:14: "Is anyone
> among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the
> church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with
> oil in the name of the Lord."?

this is one point that I dont think is absolutly neccessary to be anointed with oil, as I have been in the hospital, and though lots of people have prayed, have never had oil annointed and I recovered, but I dont think its a bad thing to be annointed with oil either, plus working the city, I have seen many people revived by medics and surgeons that were not annonited by oil, so I believe that god can and will heal people even without being annointed, but again I dont think its a bad thing to be annointed either.
fate


>
> 8) Southern Baptists replace Confirmation (the laying
> of hands) with Baptism, and completely get rid of
> Confirmation!. How do you justify this with Hebrews
> 6:2, Acts 19:5-6, and especially Acts 8:14-17?

I didnt know they did that, we also have hands on praying as well as baptism, so I think both are ok
fate


>
> 9) Southern Baptists condemn infant Baptism. How do
> you justify this with Acts 2:38-39, Acts 16:15, Acts
> 16:33, Acts 18:18, 1 Corithians 1:16, John 3:5, Romans
> 6:4 (cf. Psalm 51:5), and Colossians 2:11-12?

While there is absoultly nothing wrong with infant baptism, I also think kids should be baptized also when they are old enough to realize that the decision to give your life to god is a very important step, and they should be aware and make their own decison to be baptized, but like I said I would never condemn infant baptism as well
fate


>
> 10) Southern Baptists readily pray for eachother and
> ask others to pray for them, but they refuse to ask
> the saints in Heaven, who sit with God, to pray for
> them. We are one Body. You cannot exclude the alive in
> Heaven from the Body of Christ. In the same way you
> ask fellow Christians on Earth to pray for you, why
> not ask the (perfectly alive) saints in Heaven, who
> are undoubtedly saved, to pray for you?

I would agree to a point as well on that, but I also think you should first pray to god, above any and all else, but no there is nothing wrong with praying for the saints and those who died in christ as well to pray for you. plus even though I am not catholic I kinda like the idea of St. Michael being the patron saint of protecting police, and medics, and firefighters, as god knows we need all the help we can get, vest might stop bullets, but the rest of us is uncovered so I like the idea of all the help we can get.
fate

>
> Peace and prayer,
> Gabriel

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.