"Catholics and Christians"

Post Reply New Topic

Yup.  Every social group is defined by this one unwritten rule: "If you are not 100% like Us, then you are not one of Us".

I hate every rule that divides us and keeps us apart.

Thats not true for Jews though. Like I pointed out, lots of Jews eat pork, reject the existence of God, toy with Buddhism, and so forth, yet they are still considered Jewish. Its only the belief in Jesus that would disqualify them. I guess it is due to the historic grudge Jews have against Christians.

Now, if you say that "Jews don't believe in Jesus because of that grudge", thats not true. At least if you ask Orthodox Jews then they would say they don't believe in Jesus because He didn't meet the qualifications of Messiah (the way they see it to be). But thats not the question we are asking. We are asking why do Orthodox Jews would still consider atheist Jews to be Jews yet they won't consider Messianic Jews to be Jews. That is quite a bit different.

Incidentally, just a century ago thing weren't that way. In particular, I read about a Jewish couple being excommunicated for the fact that they kissed each other before marriage. So, within *that* context, it would make perfect sense why they would reject Jews that believe in Jesus. But we are not living in that context any more. Today Jews kiss before marriage -- and have sex before marriage too -- and none of them get excommunicated for it.

Personally. I have always thought that the judging of man should not be for man to judge.
Leave the judging to God (aka Jehovah, Yahweh etc.).

We are but creations and not the creator.
Each man (etc) to be judged on our own merit. Only we can be judged for our own actions, no one else.

When it comes to the fine details of the various forms of Christianity, there are quiet a diverse variety with regards to what the various denominations have faith in, and that is what makes them different.

Protestant was a reformation of Christianity, which in itself, is complex and started before King Henry the 8th decided to break away from the Catholic Church. King Henry the 8th was simply following a trend of the time and so that he could use it for his own means.

Catholic and Catholicism developed after various forms of early Christianity gained in popularity in what was a state run by Romans. During the time, the Roman Emperor Constantine, decided to convert to Christianity and bring together all the various versions of Christianity into one universal collection of works known to us as the new testament. Constantine also amalgamated this Christianity along with some Roman Cultural elements and beliefs.

Christmas, Easter, Birthdays, being common Roman festivals where incorporated into this new "universal" Christianity.

These were some of the abnormalities that the protestant reformists along with other minority denominations picked up on and rejected.

Some denominations also reject the concept or belief in grace, i.e. God aka JC forging our sins if we ask for His Holinesses Grace by repenting and preying for forgiveness.

Some versions of Christianity expect people also to do good works, as well as spreading the word (ministry), repenting and asking for forgiveness (grace).

My ex-wife was a Jehovah Witness, this is is why i know so much, as I studied not only with the JW's, but also did my own independent study from a scholars perspective, talked at length with my close friend who is a well educated born a gain protestant, as well as hanging out with Rasta for a lengthy period while in a reggae band with them.

I believe that the JW's doctrine is flawed, as they reject many aspects of modern Christianity's beliefs and cultural practice based on the fact that the Roman Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nisan 14 decided on these aspects, however, one insight that they completely ignored was that it was the same Council and same Emperor that put together the new testament by amalgamating the most common versions of Christianity into one book.

The Jehovah Witnesses claim to be 1st century Christians, but they then start to quote the new testament,
which did not exist in its entirely as an amalgamated work until much later than the 1st century.

They say they quote from the new testament because they say that God allowed man to put the work together, so there fore it was blessed by God, but how can they say that about this and then say that the other things that they do not like was not also "allowed to be put together by God as well". this is a major flaw in their logic.

In truthfulness, the new testament was put together out of many contrasting perspectives, some books were written by Jewish Christians that discriminate against gentiles, other books were written by Gentile Christians who discriminate against Judaist Christians, and other books were written by (Saint) Paul, who didn't even meet JC apart from in a vision on the road to Damascus, who before Christianity's rise in popularity actually used to persecute (murder) Christians under the name Saul.

I personally think that Pauls story is very fishy, as much as I would think that anyone who I met today who told me that they had just had a vision where JC told them to start a church and take donations from the members, so that you could then go on big trips around the world to spread the good word.... hmmm

But hey, that's faith for you. I don't have a problem with others believing such things, especially if it makes them better people, and after all, i am not God, I am not all knowing and all seeing. who am I to judge others?

My job is to judge my own actions and do my best to be a good person, and help others, in my own capacity to do so.
Personally, I think that living life using Christianity as a guide is a noble and worthwhile path. So why not.

Although I do not think it is mans place to judge others and not our job to start up churches with power and reign as Gods over others.

It is our job to worship God in our hearts and actions. Rather than worldly ways.
I do believe that JC intentions were to replace the corrupt Priesthood of his day, and to replace the sacrificial system, which the corrupt Pharisees were exploiting for self gain.

So to stop this system of paying for sins with sacrifices given to the priesthood, JC told everyone that he would give himself as a sacrifice to pay for all our sins, and to pay for original sin of Adam and Eve.

By doing so, his actions and life were given to replace the then present church (Judaism)
however, it was (Saint) Paul, who's vision told him to start a new church... hmmmm

but there ya go.

My personal opinion is do you best, don't get tied up with others in arguments.
try your best to be good

find peace.

Good question. Why do seculars and atheists (in secular contexts) say "Catholics and Christians".

Some years ago I even saw that on a dating site. You specify those as separate choices. I was vicariously offended for Catholics. And am not even particularly religious, and am a "culturally Protestant" White Anglo Saxon, at that.

Its because in recent years American Evangelical Protestants have commandeered the word "Christian" for themselves, and have somehow gotten everyone else to buy into applying the term only to them, and not every other sect of Christianity (other Protestants, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, etc) as well.

And that statement will depend on how you interpret Torah and the Prophets. Christians and Messianics will, most likely, agree with your claim. Traditional Jews will not.

And upon these two words hang all religious doctrines of the world: "It Depends".

Yes, Traditional Judaism requires the Messiah to fulfil their requirements,
which apparently Jesus did not, by being over qualified due to having apparent Supernatural powers.

One of the prerequisites for the Messiah from a Traditional Jewish perspective is for the Messiah to be
just a normal man without super powers etc.

Interesting really. The entire JC phenomena, if you look at it like that.

Incidentally, I personally believe that JC's ministry and the ministry of his followers where supposed to
be practiced whole heartedly during his time, for his coming return that I sincerely believe was meant to
be fairly soon after his crucifixion.

Going on the Ministry at the time, really did mean selling or giving your material possessions and relying entirely on the grace of God, while you waited for the new system to arise.

This, however, is not what happened, and thus, over 2000 years later, people decided to adapt their ministry
to being one that they didn't have to sell or give away all their material possessions but instead, they got to
erect elaborate churches, under the guidance of (Saint) Paul and give some donations to the cause to pay for their sins after confessing... .hmmm

doesn't sound that different to the old Jewish Sacrificial System.

But I guess 2000 years of going on the ministry is going to make even the most patient person cranky....
Yep. that is what i feel is one of the biggest flaws in Christianity, as much as I love most the teachings of JC and his kind, compassionate and forgiving nature.

I don't think any of us have the patience to wait 2000 years. To be honest. i get upset if i have to wait in a cue in a shop over 10 mins.... lol

Yes. the only flaw in your reasoning is that Traditional Judaism rejected JC's claim.
Having Supernatural powers did disqualify him as the Messiah.

Our debate here I believe could be regarded as the Jewish practice of midrash.

Yes, I believe this labelling is likely down to the authors own subjective opinion rather than scholarly objective statement, you get that with people who hold strong beliefs and opinions on their own faith but also others faiths.

Probably because they were brought up in a hardcore evangelical (Protestant) Christian family, or in a hardcore evangelical Christian community, and never learned any better?

What's really baffling is that even some Catholics are confused about this.

I've run into more than one Catholic who thought they were "Catholic, not Christian," and who were surprised or resistant when I mentioned that the Roman Catholic Church was one of the oldest forms of Christianity. To them, apparently, the word "Christian" meant "obnoxious in-your-face evangelical." I told them to ask their priest.

It is not an inconsistency, Jewish is a word with multiple meanings and uses;
Though the following uses the noun Judaism instead of the adjective Jewish it covers the concept.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ar ... a-religion

You're welcome to try to make the case that one of the original churches isn't Christian but you won't ever succeed.

No one branch of Christianity has a monopoly on defining Christianity.

"Amen" on both counts.

@OP.

Yes, catholics are definitely a different sort of religious beast.

But isn't that the rule of political partisanship, that some people are happy to embrace?
Do I sniff the 'H' word in the air?

*Every* single one of them?
May the gods of 'Gross Generalisations' be with you in spirit, my son.
Pax dominus.



I'd rather you didn't.



Generally speaking, err , yes, I agree with you.