Are all Catholics lost?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason B

For the better part of the 4th century it was Arian Christianity that became the dominant Christology of the day. It was Arian Christianity that penetrated into and converted pagans and Barbarians in the East, which eventually became Nestorian and Monophysite. To me, its not impossible to think this flawed and mistaken Christianity could have produced someone who was actually saved. Maybe even 2 or 3 out of the millions who followed Christ through that witness.

2 or 3?

Are you saying only 2 or 3 people or 2 or 3 million out of millions? Also, it looks like you have a favorite Brand Christ, because you mentioned that they who followed Christ through the Arian witness? So, I take that as to follow Christ out of the Arian witness? So, what exactly does that look like?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by mfblume

If someone thinks standards save then they're lost. Period. I don't care who they are. It's nothing but the blood that saves. I really don't know anyone who thinks standards save.

Wow that is shockingly direct, but I'd disagree with you on both points. I think someone can be legalistic and still be saved, despite their total ignorance. I'm not saying all legalists are saved, and those who teach are in greater danger. But I've known many "simple"oneness people who could not really discern God's Word and commands from the standards of the local church and pastor. I have hope that by God's,grace they will be saved.

Second, i find your statement that you "dont know anyone who really thinks standards save" frankly shocking. You no doubt know more OPs than I, and I'd certainly say that many or most I've known certainly believe that standards save. They wouldn't use that phrase, but certainly believe if they cut their hair, wire pants, make up, failed to tithe, went to a sporting event or movie, etc that their salvation would be in jeopardy.

Originally Posted by mfblume

I am talking about the serious issues that deal with Hebrews 6:1-2's elements. There are issues we can be off on and still be saved. But there are others we cannot be off on and be saved. When someone says the bible does NOT contain all the truth God wants, I cannot believe such a person is saved. That's not even on the same level as someone keeping sabbath as opposed to another who does not. there are degrees of what is acceptable and what is not.

I know I am not 100% on everything. But we are talking about major major issues like the things I listed in Catholic's beliefs. Are you saying you sincerely believe a person can think the Bible does Not contain all truth and still be saved? What kinds of beliefs are not in the bible that one is required to know that are in reality damnable? Who knows? the sky's the limit.

But are you saying the things I listed as beliefs of the Catholic church can be overlooked and don't affect salvation?

No, mostly I agree here. I dont think someone has to believe in inerrancy to be saved. There are major doctrines that are important. Personally I'm not willing to condemn all Catholics, and certainly not all Catholics of all time. But of all the "Christian" denominations or "churches", I'd have the most concerns for Catholics because of their superstition and outright idolatry, their legalism, their theology, and Revelation 17 (depending on one's interpretation of course).

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Ok, so pretty quickly you are narrowing down your playing field?

All of a sudden we find you to be exclusive as well?

I've always affirmed Sola Christa

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason B

Wow that is shockingly direct, but I'd disagree with you on both points. I think someone can be legalistic and still be saved, despite their total ignorance. I'm not saying all legalists are saved, and those who teach are in greater danger. But I've known many "simple"oneness people who could not really discern God's Word and commands from the standards of the local church and pastor. I have hope that by God's,grace they will be saved.

Second, i find your statement that you "dont know anyone who really thinks standards save" frankly shocking. You no doubt know more OPs than I, and I'd certainly say that many or most I've known certainly believe that standards save. They wouldn't use that phrase, but certainly believe if they cut their hair, wire pants, make up, failed to tithe, went to a sporting event or movie, etc that their salvation would be in jeopardy.


No, mostly I agree here. I dont think someone has to believe in inerrancy to be saved. There are major doctrines that are important. Personally I'm not willing to condemn all Catholics, and certainly not all Catholics of all time. But of all the "Christian" denominations or "churches", I'd have the most concerns for Catholics because of their superstition and outright idolatry, their legalism, their theology, and Revelation 17 (depending on one's interpretation of course).

Catholic idolatry?

Who is this a picture of?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason B

I've always affirmed Sola Christa

So do they.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

So, Shazeep, you should ask A catholic who stands by these statements if they believe everyone except catholics are lost.

i would never do that, because i do not care a whit what some Catholic lawyer tells me about their doctrines,

Oh, but we're hypocrites if we say a group is lost because of their belief -- not because of themselves as you think we are saying-- that contradicts what the bible says it necessary for salvation, and we are lawyers? But when it comes to a catholic, they're not hypocrites? But you did that with a muslim who told me all Christians are lost, si why be surprised?

Funny how CHRISTIANS can be demonized in your mind for the same thing that you excuse muslims and catholics over.

and a humble Catholic would not belabor me with them. I am not fearful about Catholics, or Muslims; i fear hypocrites if i fear anything.

And speaking of hypocrisy, you accuse us of being hypocrites because we claim people are lost if they do not believe the bible, and yet you are not concerned over catholics and muslims who say the same thing about everyone else apart from their religion. Do you know what hypocrites really are?

The central point might be that whatever their answer would be, God is not required to pay them any attention anyway, same as for you. You can say all Catholics are lost all you like--how many Catholics have perished due to your proclamation?

None, because I am not proclaiming that. I am proclaiming lack of faith in what the word commands us to believe is what makes us lost. If you heard me preach you'd know that. But for some reason some passing statements on a forum are a guy's obsession.

But you ignore everything we say. I already said the focus is not on "all catholics are lost," but on people who do not believe the bible are lost. Like I said, it's a stacked deck to simply ask if all catholics are lost. You are making it about people. And that is not the point. It is about what DOCTRINES they wholeheartedly believe in. And not matter how hard you try to make it about people, I will forever remind you that's not the point. It's whether or not we believe what the Word says.

You hedge and hum and haw when told catholics are people who believe the catholic dogma that you admitted was a valid concern. You said you would not talk about that. I've never seen such a web of chaos. A catholic is what a catholic believes. And it is the therefore the BELIEF and not the person, that is the issue, despite how much you twist it to be about the person.

How many Catholics have been swayed to change their mind based upon your opinion, do you think?

I saw many catholics converted because I told them what I have been focusing on here, which is not what you claim I focus upon. Believe the bible. It's not what you accuse us of presenting.... "all catholics are lost." It's rather "Believe what the word says." And voila! They come out from catholicism!

So then, what has this utterance, this belief of yours and others, served to do? It has only accomplished one thing--to out you as judgemental,

If that was what I was doing, amen! But I am not. Again why do you disregard explanations of intentions? Why do you even choose to discuss when discussion demands we consider what the person actually believes and take that as a given that it's really what they believe? I say, "It's not black, but it's white." And you say, "But it's not black. Why are you saying it is black." And I say, "I agree it's not black. It's white." And you say, "But you are saying it is black." Why do you do this?

I am judging no one. Even you admitted that relating what the bible says to a situation that is applicable is not judging the situation or people involved.

which quoting Christ's contrasting message of forgiveness and love to your consternation just verifies--or bam witness how this position has improved your or anyone else's life, and i will apologize.

How on earth can God forgive someone for believing a belief that He said damns the soul? Anyone can be forgiven of anything if they repent of it, except for the likes of what Esau did. How can you do that with the word of God? It's not even a matter of forgiveness, because God does not forgive people for holding what He says will send souls to hell. Explain to me how God forgives people who do things without repentance about things His word says damns their souls. Explain that for us. Are you saying God forgives people for being lost because they did not know about what is lost or saved?

All you have done is make enemies of friends, as near as i can tell. And you would react no differently if the shoe were on the other foot. Understand with the same measure you use, it will be measured out to you. You are flouting a spiritual principle to uphold a doctrine of men, which all have some basis in Scripture. It is you who is lost, the moment you look down on the Catholic, which includes 'helping' them 'see their error,' which always involves a doctrinal discussion, and never seems to involve doing the right thing in daily life.

If your twisted version of what I am doing were true, I would agree with you. But as I have demonstrated many times more than I can count, YOU are the one making it about PEOPLE, not me. I am making it about BELIEFS that contradict the Word. You keep pushing it toward PEOPLE being the issue and I am saying it is not people, it is what the word says and what we believe and what our hearts must believe. How you can consistently twist this in your mind is what is scary.

A pox on your doctrines--which btw is exactly what you got. If doctrine is supposed to make you so much better, why are you so much worse? Speaking generally of course; i don't think you are a bad person at all, for the record.

It's not black, You are not getting that.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

2 or 3?

Are you saying only 2 or 3 people or 2 or 3 million out of millions? Also, it looks like you have a favorite Brand Christ, because you mentioned that they who followed Christ through the Arian witness? So, I take that as to follow Christ out of the Arian witness? So, what exactly does that look like?

I'm saying, sarcastically, 2 or 3 single people out of the millions and millions. Obviously the insinuation is if there could even be 1 or 2 or 3 saved out of the millions, its possible there were many.

I'm not one who buys easy believism. I believe that many (maybe most) who have identified as (nominally) Christian through the last 2000 years were not truly converted, hence not saved. But unlike yall, i dont think it's as cut and dry as "what was said at baptism and did they speak in tongues". Using that criteria, next to no one has been saved. And I believe its a wrong criteria and contrary to the work of God in mens lives throughout history, who yall say are damned. (Example, John Wycliffe, John Huss, Charles Tyndale, and hundreds more I've brought up before, all bearing the fruit of genuine conversion, all furthering the gospel, and most at the expense of their own lives).

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So do they.

Perhaps some do, though officially they believe in salvation through the church. But seeing as how they affirm Muslims also share in the plan of salvation, I'm not too sure your statement is accurate.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason B

I'm saying, sarcastically, 2 or 3 single people out of the millions and millions. Obviously the insinuation is if there could even be 1 or 2 or 3 saved out of the millions, its possible there were many.

I'm not one who buys easy believism. I believe that many (maybe most) who have identified as (nominally) Christian through the last 2000 years were not truly converted, hence not saved. But unlike yall, i dont think it's as cut and dry as "what was said at baptism and did they speak in tongues". Using that criteria, next to no one has been saved. And I believe its a wrong criteria and contrary to the work of God in mens lives throughout history, who yall say are damned. (Example, John Wycliffe, John Huss, Charles Tyndale, and hundreds more I've brought up before, all bearing the fruit of genuine conversion, all furthering the gospel, and most at the expense of their own lives).

Bro, you are old!

You know John Wycliffe, Huss, and Tyndale?

How do you know their fruit?

Furthering the Gospel is salvational?

Paul the Apostle didn't believe that?

Neither did Jesus Christ, Jesus told His disciples not to stop a man who wasn't following them, but at judgement Jesus rejects them. Even while they tell Him that they casted out devils and did mighty works in His name.

Jason B, you might want to think about this.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Jason B

Wow that is shockingly direct, but I'd disagree with you on both points. I think someone can be legalistic and still be saved, despite their total ignorance. I'm not saying all legalists are saved, and those who teach are in greater danger.

How can a soul who believes standards save them be saved, when the bible demands we believe nothing we do can save us, lest we boast and take the glory to ourselves?

What do you mean by legalistic?

If people think the cross PLUS THEIR WORKS save them, then I am fearful for their souls. If they attribute to salvation something other than the blood, hooboy....

But I've known many "simple"oneness people who could not really discern God's Word and commands from the standards of the local church and pastor. I have hope that by God's,grace they will be saved.

Second, i find your statement that you "dont know anyone who really thinks standards save" frankly shocking. You no doubt know more OPs than I, and I'd certainly say that many or most I've known certainly believe that standards save.

I may have come across some who do, but that is utterly blasphemous. How can God overlook that, brother. Explain it to me. Explain to me how we are not saved by works but by his grace through faith, lets we boast, and yet those who think they are saved by their works can be saved.

They wouldn't use that phrase, but certainly believe if they cut their hair, wire pants, make up, failed to tithe, went to a sporting event or movie, etc that their salvation would be in jeopardy.

Ahh.. here's where I think you're missing something. If someone thinks LACK OF DOING SOMETHING causes them to lose salvation, they are standing on a valid principle. And if they think the start of something they are avoiding will lose their salvation then it's the same thing. That is valid. I think their concept of what it is we cease doing or start doinjg may be offkey, but that does not mean they think salvation initially comes from doing or not doing those things.

For example, if I start cursing and swearing and hating people, then I lose my salvation. that does not mean refraining from cussing and swearing and hatred saves me. It just means the salvation that THE CROSS ALONE gave me is TOSSED away when I commit sins.

It's like saying the fire on the candlesticks was started by GOD, not man. Man must keep it burning, though, by trimming the wicks. Trimming the wicks is not what started the fire. but failure to trim the wicks will see the fire go out.

Similarly, letting go of the resistance to hatred, and giving in to hatred, will cause me to lose my salvation, but resisting hatred is not what gave me salvation.

No, mostly I agree here. I dont think someone has to believe in inerrancy to be saved. There are major doctrines that are important. Personally I'm not willing to condemn all Catholics, and certainly not all Catholics of all time. But of all the "Christian" denominations or "churches", I'd have the most concerns for Catholics because of their superstition and outright idolatry, their legalism, their theology, and Revelation 17 (depending on one's interpretation of course).

When the catholic doctrine teaches there are truths not contained in the bible that we must know to be saved, then a catholic is a catholic because they believe that teaching. I cannot see how holding such a belief can see someone saved, for what doctrines outside the scripture might they cling to that are utterly damnable?