Protestant vs Catholic

I am Protestant thinking about converting to Catholicism.

Can some Protestant explain me briefly, why Catholics are wrong and you're right? I only know about indulgence selling.

Thing bothering me about Protestantism is truth relativism. If women are getting ordained now, maybe everything I believe in now will be obsolete in a few years.

Attached: 220px-Martin_Luther_by_Cranach-restoration.jpg (220x236, 12.48K)

Other urls found in this thread:

apuritansmind.com/justification/the-early-church-and-sola-fide/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The Bible can, why not read it instead ?

Attached: c2944f8ea894faf04c8ceb0a041b97bb9f46ac3342219c42e0e1198c4afdffe7.png (1010x274, 18.08K)

Most urgently, protestantism is right and catholicism is wrong on soteriology. The sacraments are works and opposed to Ephesians 2:8-9 which is the basis for the doctrine of sola fide.

Compare apples to apples, that's the same issue with Vatican 2.
If your protestant denomination is ordaining women, you are right to leave it. Evangelicalism is the least relativist because of it's doctrine of the inerrancy of scripture.

The very best way to judge Christian groups is by their fruits. Who correctly states the gospel in line with scripture, and is actually spreading it in obedience to the great commission? Evangelicals. That's the point of the word.

Thank you.
thought provoking for brainlet like me.
can you clarify
what are you talking about?

Relativism and postmodernism are present in the RCC as evidenced by Vatican 2

but it's not present among Evangelicals?

No. The basis for evangelicalism is a rejection of relativism. Evangelicals are identified by the doctrine of the inerrancy of scripture.

The result of the "fundamentalist" vs "modernist" controversy of the 20th century was the establishment of "Evangelical protestant" vs "mainline protestant".

I see, thank you very much.

apuritansmind.com/justification/the-early-church-and-sola-fide/

Please read "Grace & Justification: An Evangelical's Guide" by Steve Wood (Evangelical -> Catholicism) if you want to get a fair understanding of what the Church means by Faith & Works. The semantics in the words are different between the two Churches which causes a lot of confusion and disagreements.

The sacraments are works. They are vehicles of sanctifying grace.
Except not even a comma changed in the doctrine.
Ok I see you are baiting.
I wonder how America got Christian

Prove it faggot.

Fixed.

Outed as a biblical illiterate

Sorry if I don't know the latest meme in 21st century baptist "theology"

Attached: nyece.png (832x578, 245.4K)

...

I just wanna say that Catholicism is no different from Pharisaic Judaism. I mean literally, the appeal to tradition to condone their unbiblical acts, the dress ups and funny hats and just their entire view of salvation is pelagian no matter how much you deny it. Paul says in Romans 5:1

Catholics don't have this. They fear every day of going to hell or at the very least burning in purgatory for X amount of years. It's why they have confession to get rid of mortal sins and go mass to get rid of venial sins. And don't even get me started on the mass. The Catholics believe that the mass is the same sacrifice on the cross that happened 2000 years ago. Yes, they're crucifying Christ a second time each week but use sophistry to try and hide it by saying that it's the same but not another one. Even if that was the case it would still violate Hebrews 10:1-3

Ultimately, the Catholics don't have a distinction between the law and the gospel. To them the only thing that changed with Christ's ascension was that we just got new rules but nothing changed. We still need to offer up the sacrifice of the mass, we still need to do penance and to just show you how much uncertainty the papist have on their death bed they need to do last rites just in case they didn't get rid of every sin. If I haven't said it enough I'll say it again. CATHOLICS HAVE NO PEACE WITH GOD!

And this is only the tip of the iceberg you mentioned indulgences but that's not even the worse, they even believe Mary the be co-redemtrix. It's such a extremely high view of Mary that even the orthodox think it's insane. Literally, Google it. It's mariolatry.

I'm probably gonna get banned for this but If I do just know it's because I'm right.

Whoever wrote that shows that he lacks reading comprehension.

Sacraments are works of you go by the biblical definition of what a work is and not a man made version.

What do you think this means?
Romans 4:1-5

This is off-topic but I don't want to make a thread for this. Why do you believe that women cannot be ordained as priests and bishops in Catholicism and Protestantism? I read the common reasons why not, but I'm not convinced of them.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Paul clearly says they shouldn't speak in church settings. He speaking specifically of liturgy, because there's no one else who should be talking like that in a church to begin with (it's not a cafeteria, after all.. which chatter all around, but a solemnity remembering Christ's death and resurrection).

Secondly, the priest serves as model of our Great High Priest in heaven. He's not a woman.

If it was all so acceptable, we would have surely seen any number of great women in the early serving in this capacity (Sts Mary, Mary Magdalene, etc). There's no evidence of this, despite the great honor given to these women. That should say something as well.

Lastly, there's nothing forbidding a woman to teach in general or be on missions (Paul was accompanied by the couple Priscilla and Aquila after all). And the home itself is sort of a "mini church", where the mother plays an important role in teaching her children in faith. Only a retard would silence women so much that she can't even teach her own children… but I think some misogynistic readings have gone this far. So the Church isn't historically on this extreme end either.

Bro I even gave you the reference in the first post that you scoffed at. Ephesians 2 talks about the role of works in relation to salvation.
Have you read Ephesians? You don't know what it says yet here you are insulting me.

You should read proverbs when you're done opening Ephesians for the first time

Proverbs 17:28 KJV — Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

Attached: Frequency of reading scripture among Catholics.png (680x600, 62.58K)

1 Timothy 2:11-15 KJV — Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Look at the state of the Episcopalian church and tell me women bishops was a good idea. Spoiler Alert you can't

Attached: women-pastors-because-1tim-32-titusig-and-1-cor-14-34-7237430.png (500x986, 220.55K)

Pick one. America is a living proof for me that protestantism is false.

Breathing is a work too.
If you guys just wasted a minute reading the Catholic doctrine on this, but no it's better to say shit just for the sake of shiposting.
I'm not even gonna repeat for the 99999x time the same thing we sua all over this board.

I was in your shoes a few months ago (former Baptist) and am currently attending a Catholic Church. Here's my advice for you:

I was talking about the evangelisation of Mexico and below.
And I totally agree with you. The USA are the proof Martin Luther was wrong.

And what country better demonstrates a true Christian population?

Catholic is some weird kind of Marian cult that evaluates Mary as equal or superior to Jesus.

And it makes Mary ultra sexy and very Aphrodite-like, so it makes Christianity into a weird sex cult.

W-what?

Your mind is already corrupted if you look at depictions of Mary in a sexual manner. She is admitedly made to look beautiful, but it's the kind of beauty that serves as a symbolic representation of goodness and purity. You are supposed to admire her as you would admire a beautiful rose. The explicit association of anything beautiful with sex is a symptom of our decadent times.

I hope you repent, I don't think even satan would venture to say what you say.

A simple "I don't know" would have sufficed but I'll tell you anyway. First of all. We know what Paul means when he says works, without the addition of the word law, because he defines it later on in Romans 9:11
To Paul works is any form of human exertion. Whether good or bad and so to say sacraments are not included would be false. But oh, you'll say that sacraments aren't things we do ourselves but rather God working in use and because of that they aren't works. But read Philippians 2:12-13
If you're going to say that because it's not us doing it But God doing it through us and so it's not a work then every good work humans do would not be a work and so the Catholic apologetic there fails.

Are you 15?

I honestly don't think Protestants actually live by Sola Fide. At least none of the cool ones.

All I have to ask is one question: Would you allow a gay orgy on the pulpit floor of your church (or any orgy, for that matter)? What would you say someone "assured you": "It's OK, they said they believe in Jesus"?

I'm going to assume you're a decent Christian and say this not a good situation and put a stop to it and tell them all to repent. Because you don't believe in mere faith alone yourself. We make value judgements about how "faith in God = fidelity to God" all of the time, and would be alarmed that anything like the above can come from a self-proclaimed Christians.

This is an extreme and unrealistic example, but think about it. Even Paul still gives TONS of moral advice. There must be more nuance to what he's saying than mere faith. Same with Christ. The BULK of the Gospels are instructions on how to live in the kingdom and serve God. Only the end is the crucifixion. Was all of the prior stuff just a waste of time?! Should the Gospels just be "Chapter 1: Jesus is born. Chapter 2: Jesus dies and rises." Of course not.

"Sola Fide" is a cheap slogan, but no self-respecting Christian actually lives it. Even the ones who kept yelling Sola Fide. Look at Steve Anderson. One minute he says Faith Alone, the next he's isolating himself from the world and telling everyone to repent.

You don't understand what sola fide means
It's a soteriological term

1/
Catholics believe salvation through works, not faith alone, which is opposite to Romans 3:24.

2/ They appeal to traditions like the Pharisees and focus on the works as in

3/ They don't allow priests to marry, which lead to all sorts of sexual misconducts in the church. But again God allows priests to marry even in the times of Moses (Lev 21) and what god wouldn't want his followers to produce more offsprings to worship him?

4/ pics. They pray to Mary and the saints, but Christ tells us to pray to Him alone

5/ They make statues and images of Christ and Mary, which was forbidden in the 10 commandments (Exodus 20:4-5)

Attached: Vatican (2).jpg (593x596 326.8 KB, 345K)

So now it's complicated and there's more theological hoops to jump through. Besides that, you're talking about a soteirology based solely on a few lines of Paul alone, without any context (and not even context to the rest of what he says.. like I pointed out about him giving moral instruction himself). Like I said, it's just a slogan.

That picture is shopped.

Attached: heresy.jpg (1516x540 196.45 KB, 119.68K)

I'll just add that I'm not a Catholic, and I understand why Luther revolted somewhat. Not all that he "protested" was biblical. He was angry about abuses.

But he jumped the shark with "faith alone". And started equating Christian Ethical Living itself with the abuses of the church of his day. God forbid these are the same. Why didn't he just leave it at that? He went completely radical with what "works" even meant. This is why he even considered getting rid of the Epistle of James himself. Not even Popes are this arrogant.. to singlehandedly "by fiat" declare what's canon or not.

He chucked out 7 of the OT books (although it was because he translated from a Hebrew text, and the Jews chucked those books out around the 5th century) and nobody complained, but that's because they didn't hear the OT read at Liturgy/Mass very often, if ever. But the Epistle of St. James is a big deal, since that's NT, and read substantially more often during Liturgy/Mass than any OT book.

You misunderstand what sola fide means. Read from the man John Calvin himself:
Antidote to the council of Trent
You see that truth faith is synonymous with good works and we don't call it once saved always saved but rather perseverance of the saints because we are not just given any faith but a persevering one.

No it's not complicated
Yes it is considering the whole of scripture
You are saved by faith
Soteriological means related to salvation. Didn't mean to give you a brain boo boo. You just redefined sola fide to mean moral relativism.

You are saved, then your fruits will prove it externally.

Before I begin I would just like to say that even James doesn't deny sola fide. Read James 2:23.

James 2 is talking about a justified person who is now fulfilling the fruits of his faith. You first have to understand the differences between justification and declaration.

First off lets start with 2 verse from the bible. First of all lets look at Romans 4:3 Here it talks about how Abraham was justified by faith now lets read James 2:21. Now to take both at face value would put you into a contradiction. If you really interpret both the same you will have to conclude what some Muslims even claim, namely that James is contradicting Paul. But they aren't talking about the same thing.

In Romans 4 we are discussing how one is "Made" righteous. This is proven by Paul's quoting Genesis 15, this was when he was first "made" righteous. Then we move on to James 2. Here when he says was not our father Abraham justified by works he isn't even referencing the same chapter as Paul IE genesis 15. He's quoting Genesis 22. This was when Abraham did his good work of sacrificing his son on the altar and thus having his justification "declared."

Now what is the difference between being declared righteous and being made righteous? Being made righteous is by faith "Alone." If it was by anything else then we will have something to boast about but not before God. Now this then leads people to think, who so we can sin but as long as we have faith we will be saved? Absolutely not! Remember what Philippians 1:6 says: he who began a good work in you will lead it to completion. And so to say someone had faith and then continues to sin would say that God is a lair and did not lead to completion a good work he started.

This is why one will later on be "declared" righteous. This means that the fruits and evidence of a lively faith will come. It is why after Abraham was actually "made" righteous is genesis 15 he then was being openly "declared" by his works in genesis 22.

I know what Calvin thinks. He teaches Sanctification accompanying Faith. Which is basically the same thing as any other decent Christian teaches, but he had to be jerk and create another rift in the church over mere semantics. He's biggest followers were some of the most widely known "moralists" of all time: The Puritans. This doesn't come from any "faith alone". It's holistic.. the whole process of our salvation, that is.

You're not giving me a "boo boo". I'm telling you to drop the cheap branding and be honest with yourself.

...

This is exactly what all reformed Christians believe. And it's insane to say that it's mere semantics that separate us. That one word "Alone" has huge implications. Without it you then are lead into the whole romist sacramental system. We are saying that justification is by faith "alone" and the accompanying good works are God's work in us, leading our faith to completion as per Philippians 1:6. To say that by our actions we can stunt God's process of completion is to our salvation in our hands. The good works we do are the by products of our faith. The result of our faith that is not alone in it's working.

If that was true, Orthodox and Catholics would be exactly the same. But they aren't. They are both sacramental, but there are different approaches here (for one, you won't find Orthodox making definitive statements about unbaptized infants going to hell). I'm not going to derail on all of this, but this is not an either/or situation.

No. What makes you say that? Are you outraged over me offering guidance, that might not align with your world view, to a fellow brother exploring his faith, or did my post somehow come off as immature?

Pretty sure he's outraged at you worshiping the Church of Harlot, queen of mysteries.

I thought I should reply to this too. Maybe I am insane. But I meant that statement in a positive way. I'm getting tired of arguing with what are basically believers in Christ who want to lead good lives. These people aren't my enemies. I feel a kinship to them, no matter what denomination. And I don't mean this in a silly ecumenical way. But an agreement on core, fundamental principles. This is why some of these big rifts upset me… that in all cases, each side had a lot of Christians who were essentially trying to lead good lives the best they could. And they killed each other! What the hell.

She's a winnie the pooh semitic mother for christ sake, stop trying to make her look like winnie the pooh Aphrodite.
A beautiful rose has thorn, dumbass.

And yet you worship Mary, the Whore of Babylon.

This is how heresies grow.

Spare the rod, spoil the child.

No, lol, the Protestant revolt was a revolt against God himself. There is no reconciliation of such recalcitrance and post facto bad theology.

Attached: 1534091489958.png (1794x547, 183.77K)

Protestant at least adheres to the Bible.
Catholics just worship pagan gods, and put in Isis/Aphrodite Idol.

Some fights over "heresies" are over minutia and fought by the superstitious. At least the early church fought heretics that truly mattered. On the very nature of Christ and the Trinity.

No, I think the Church is the heretic in worshiping Mary.

I don't think there's much to help you with that. A billion Catholics could tell you they don't worship Mary, but you insist that they do and don't even allow them to speak for themselves.

Because during the mass the priest takes on persona Christi, something a woman simply cannot do.

Yet a billion of Catholic make idols of Mary, bowing before it and praying before it.

Yep, not worshiping it, right.

Like pottery.

It's a real possibility for all of us, and since we're fallen we need to stay awake and not fall into sin. There's fear when we're stubborn and don't want to completely let go of sin, but when we live in a state of grace and complete our obligations there's no fear.

Please provide the undisaptable proof that said Church is still the same Church as of now?
At least they follow the supposed words of God, not traditions of men.

You can always be a pagan if you like traditions of men.

Lmfao you just proved his point.

What point?

That the worship and sexualizing of Mary is very creepy?

Mary certainly didn't look like Aphrodite.

I'm not supportive of the statues, but they're not bowing and praying the way you think. Bowing was never simply reserved for just God in the old world. In some cultures (like Europe), it was to royalty.. in some existing cultures, it's merely to seniority (I'm part Asian.. it's common there). And praying is just talking, when it comes down to it. The only difference between asking someone on earth for their prayers and asking a saint is which direction you look. Or are you telling me that you've never said to a pastor or someone: "Please pray for me"? Because that's all intercessory prayer is.

Even the book of Revelation notes those in heaven bringing prayers to God: "And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

And like St. James noted: "The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."

Matthew 16:18

Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are non-contradictory. The richest aspect of Protestantism is them childishly taking for granted everything that the Catholic Church built, this you would never understand until you study the history of the one true Church, the body of Christ that you are excommunicated from.

You're literally a pagan. Christianity to you is up to your own fallible interpretation with no tradition to fall back on, tradition that the 12 Apostles themselves handed down to their successors in accordance with the will of Christ Jesus. Every one of the tens of thousands of Protestant sects in the world is an ethnocultural pagan congregation that wears the skin of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

Attached: 8106812-3x2-700x467.jpg (700x467, 89.36K)

Again, excuses excuses excuses.

I'm winnie the pooh vietnamese, and Jesus said you bow to no one but God.
In asian culture, praying is only for the death or gods, praying for a living person is weird.

So where's the proof that said church is the same Church as it now.
Sacred Tradition is included in the Sacred Scripture, it is not found in the church of men.
Except you know, scriptures.
Again, tradition of men, not Sacred, it is in fact a heresy to say they are traditions of god.

It is praying to God, and just asking saints to pray to God for you as well. In all cases, it's about God.

So just pray to God per Jesus's word.

Why pray to men?

I consider it talking or calling attention to. And besides that, we should "pray without ceasing" as St. Paul said. Always keep your eyes above. Lots of time for talking to God and heaven alike, if you want.

I understand most people approach prayer much more formally, but that's impossible if you "pray without ceasing". Formality is best in Church itself, or praying with others in general.

And I consider it heresy.

Just pray to god. If you are a Christian, at least follow Christ's word.

It is not the works we do that save us or our efforts to stay awake but God who justifies. That is why I can have peace with God.
Philippians 1:6

I just quoted Revelation and St. James above. Christ gave them their words. So I am following him. Secondly, I could quote the Deuterocanon on this too, but you don't even consider that the Word.. so it's pointless. Your idea of what the Word of God is is different unfortunately. And not ALL communication is meant to be worship.. I don't know why you keep insisting that. The Psalms themselves make jubilant statements like this:

"Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!"

It's not merely to be read for your amusement. It's a call to heaven.

Pray without ceasing to god.

Not men.

Repent.

Repent for talking? Repent for not being a man who merely lives according to the flesh? Repent for acknowleding that the Church is One (in heaven and earth)? Repent for living with the reality of the Kingdom of God NOW, rather than in some smallminded, dejected state that thinks I need physical death to be in heaven? No. No. No.

We already experience death in Baptism. And the Church is bigger than what your eyes see, I assure you.

Repent for praying to other spirits, men, women who are not the Christian God.

Repent.

You know it's wrong. Stop it.

I'm "talking" to you. Are you going to label that bad too.. that I'm "talking to another spirit" that isn't God? Is ALL communication now suddenly wrong?

I'll leave with this. I'm done afterwards. Christ himself said the Spirit would guide us into all truth. And what we're talking about already started happening early on in the church. Your whole belief system revolves on the Spirit never guiding anyone, and just letting the church fall into "paganism" and "other spirits" and literally having the gates of hell prevail. You literally believe that EVERYONE was wrong, that the Spirit never guided anything, and Christ was a liar… until 1500 years later and some random German guy got it all right.

Rebuke St. Cyprian and St. Ephraim while you're at it. I'm the least of your worries.

"Let us be mutually mindful of each other, let us ever pray for each other, and if one of us shall, by the speediness of the Divine vouchsafement, depart hence first, let our love continue in the presence of the Lord, let not prayer for our brethren and sisters cease in the presence of the mercy of the Father." - St. Cypria 258 AD

"Remember me, ye heirs of God, ye brethren of Christ, supplicate the Saviour earnestly for me, that I may be freed though Christ from him that fights against me day by day.

Ye victorious martyrs who endured torments gladly for the sake of the God and Saviour; ye who have boldness of speech towards the Lord Himself; ye saints, intercede for us who are timid and sinful men, full of sloth, that the grace of Christ may come upon us, and enlighten the hearts of all of us that so we may love him" - St. Ephraim 373 AD


"Stop it" - user 2019

I don't think so, man. But your welcome to join the rest of the Church when you like.

You can talk to me.

But if you pray for me, and bow before me and make idols of me, you are a heretic, plain and simple.

Tbh in 2018, none.

Lol
May God have mercy upon you because you insulted his mother.

Except that already St. Iraneus call the church of Rome the Catholic Church, after the nestorian schism the church in Rome was still called the Catholic Church, after the Eastern schism the church in Rome was still called the Catholic Church, after the protestant reformation the church in Rome was still called the Catholic Church….
Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church in 33AD. Therefore its the Church of God.
Btw our rites or discipline isn't Tradition.
Tradition is doctrine, like Christology, justification, trinity, basically a guide to avoid false interpretations of the Bible like you do.
*splits into 30 000 denoms*
I'm sure that's what Christ wanted when he prayed for us to stay as one like He and the Father are One.
Knowing about the Holy Trinity, the divinity of Christ etc are traditions of man. OK bro.

You insult Jesus's mother by making her into Aphrodite/Isis.

Repent.

Until they destroy every idols, bury every "saints" and donate all their wealth to the poor and needy, they will never be right.

The logic, and implying Mary was ever potrayed as Aphrodite.
You know that Aphrodite appears naked on the paintings right?

Hmm, and why should I trust this Iraneus?
Proof? Did Jesus call his Church "Catholic"?
Again, traditions of men, into the trash.
I'm sure Christ told the goyim to go worship his mother, the Whore of Baylon.
Found in scriptures, thus sacred traditions. Jack shit to do with the Church.

Thanks for proving my point.
You have no argument other than insults.
Yeah Catholicism is a pagan cult and in every document everyone since the 1st century said otherwise just to fool the goyim. You are the one who is right and saw through the lies.

Her idols in the Church sure do portrait her as such.
Aphrodite is a goddess, she can put on clothes if she wants, or if her followers want to disguise her.

Where did I insult you though?

Precisely, it is a semitic goddess cult.

Because he was a disciple of St. John.
Did the gates of hell prevailed right after John died? Btw clement of Rome was the 3rd Pope when John was alive.
Odly he still remained in the Church.
Did Jesus ever used the word Trinity?
Then the trinitarian doctrine is wrong.
Also Catholic just means universal.
Catholic Church = universal Church.
Washing the hands like the pharisees = theology.
Running out of arguments? You look like a scratched CD.

And? Does it make him literally unable to make a mistake? Why should I trust him?
He didn't, but he clearly defined himself, his father and the holy spirit.
Exactly, traditions of men are not sacred tradition. No matter how much you bow to the Pope, no respect to god is given.
>

Then Christ made a promise he couldn't keep. The church fell in the hands for Satan until Luther, something that contradicts "the gates of hell shall not prevail"
Also St. Ignatius, St. Justin, St. Clement which is even mentioned in the scriptures, and many other said the same thing.
And he clearly said his church would be universal.
We don't worship the pope. Who told you that? We respect him because he is a successor of the Apostles.
Btw in fact the pope is my servant. He is the servant of all the servants of Christ.
Its on of his titles.
Discipline=theology
Ok.
The Chinese and the japanese portray her as an Asian woman, tiggers portray her as a black women, the same about Jesus and other saints. We in Europe potray her and the main characters of the Bible as white men, when they are truly semites.
That's why Paul tells Timothy for people to obey the Church, the "pillar of truth".
The churches of men are fallible like yours.
We are not atheists like you and believe God is with us guiding us.
As I said Arius had a different interpretation of his words, like every protestant. Who's right?
If there ever was a church inspired by the Holy Spirit and didn't let her err. Oh well too bad Jesus left us to our own like an abandoned child right in the beggining.
What if you are wrong too?

ID changed because I'm on a phone

Again, no proof at all that the Catholic church is the church founded by Peter, none at all.
And? Does that mean that the church would be one single institution? Hmm?
You bow before him.
Then ask him to bow before you and give you his wealth.
Discipline is not.
So again, none of them are worshiping Mary, but various of their goddesses, for the asian Kannon/Empress of the West Garden, for the tiggers just some random tiggers.
Who cares about what Paul/Saul says? Saul didn't even winnie the pooh meet Christ.
Yes they are, as evident in Jesus's time.
Holy shit winnie the pooh christian, so you let your nose be led by men?
Speaking like a goddamn heretic. You have no belief in Christ, just the Church of the whore of babylon because it gives you sweet comfort/lies.
Then we can discuss about it.

Matthew 28:18-20:
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
Christ never left the church he left to Peter, the apostles like Paul left Timothy left other peoe in their place and those people left other people in their place etc etc until today.
And why aren't they wrong? Because Christ promised them so.
Its really a matter of church history now that you guys ignore for a reason.
Don't you bow before your king?
Don't you bow before asking a women in marriage?
Are you worshipping them as Gods? Wew
Do you watch TV? The pope does literally that when he washes the feet of marginals in Holy Thursday.
And I don't want his 10 dollars.
And implying the Catholic Church is rich. We only have palaces because the Vatican used to be a big country like any other.
For people like you the pope should live in a wood shack starving everyday.
He would be in a position where the political and religious enemies of the church could wipe her out of the map.
They do the same with Jesus and other saints.
Are you saying they don't worship Jesus?
When you look at a picture of Christ aren't you worshipping then a stupid pagan deity too?

That being said the only thing you can say is muh Babylon and my idolatry and such conversation is a waste of my time.
I'll let you with those doubts on your mind.

never did I a reference in that verse that Peter's Church is the catholic church, nor that the Catholic church is THE god's church. None.
I don't since currently my country has no king.
Nope, heresy.
Kings are divinely ordained.
So show up to the Catholic church and ask he does that to YOU, you specifically.
I want the Church's wealth, I want his 10 dollars, I want his billions of dollar.
You mean like winnie the pooh Jesus did?
Like winnie the pooh Jesus was?
Yes! They aren't. They are worshiping random chink/tigger as Jesus.
Paul hasn't met Christ, the fact you trust him at all is suspicious.
The high priests in the temple.
So follow Him, not the Pope, not any priest who participate in the Church of the Harlot.
I don't even trust pastor Anderson, the man is clearly too prideful to be a christian.
Because I believe I'm correct. You are welcome to discuss about this.
But the Catholic church is not correct, this is not up to discussion.

Don't curse like that about God. Ironic you call people heretics, and then can't control yourself enough that you blaspheme in very the same sentence.

I don't care about this particular debate anymore, but don't do that.

2019, secular democracy everywhere, difficult to find "true Christian population" in such a state of affairs. But you will find places that are doing better than US - basically whole Eastern Europe, Russia, I would argue as far as faith is concerned maybe even western europe some countries. What happened is that the "superiority of liberal democracy" spread from the America, being accepted or imposed as the highest ideal. Decay in America caused it, the decay spread to other countries as well, of course. Saying that we are no better off now in some European countries is not exactly an argument against the thesis that America and UK are the living examples that Protestantism is rotten by relativism.