Catholicism is not Christianity

To me, Catholics and Christians are the same insofar both groups deny they are Christ. It's like an unwritten rule that they agree on. If you asked them if they are a sinner they would say "yes yes yes". If you asked them if they are Christ they would say, "no, I ain't Christ. I ain't no angel neither". We can call this Christiaintity (Christ-I-Ain't. I ain't Christ). So far, Jesus is the only one who accepted his Self as Christ. Despite him saying, "follow me", all the Christiaints draw a red line in the sand at the point they too must accept Christ as their Self. Unlike Jesus, none will confess that they made this world, and so, none have been forgiven for it.

So, Christiaintity is a non-starter, and leads back here, to hell, round and round, in circles, wasting our time.

The opposite of Christiaintity is Christiamity (Christ I Am. I Am Christ. Or just plain, I Am).

Birds of a feather...
 
Last edited:
...These groups need perhaps thousands more years of re-incarnational experience...

That's a nice fantastical narrative the Hindus and Brahmans have been pushing on morons, which the Jews and then Jesus continued to perpetuate, to try to come to grips with mortality.

Too bad it's bullshit.
 
That's a nice fantastical narrative the Hindus and Brahmans have been pushing on morons, which the Jews and then Jesus continued to perpetuate, to try to come to grips with mortality.

Too bad it's bullshit.

Well it's not a required article of faith that you need in order for Christ to be saved.

Both incarnation and re-incarnation are phenomenon. By that i mean they are appearances that are perceived to the degree they are believed and experienced. The experience is evidence of your belief in them. Your belief in either phenomenon, or any phenomenon at all, must come to zero, in order for Christ to be saved.

You are right that belief in the phenomenon seems to have had some traction among Jews and early followers of Jesus, some thinking he was a re-incarnated prophet of some sort, for example. That view was changed by an official narrative from the Magisterium, that you only get one chance in a very limited window of time. This augmented the heaven-vs-hell narrative, ramping up the fear factor, all the more effective to modify behavior. So that is an example of priest-craft.

No, you don't need to believe in re-incarnation for Christ to be saved. You do need to disbelieve it as much as you do need to disbelieve in any incarnation. It doesn't help Christiaints to believe in incarnation, and disbelieve in re-incarnation. Nor does it help any kind of atheist, theist or deist, to believe in incarnation, and to disbelieve in re-incarnation.

Believing in incarnation is enough to save the believer from Christ being saved instead. A believer in incarnation will experience the phenomenon of re-incarnation, whether they officially believe it, or not. At the highest level of the world, it is believed. At the level of belief that turns the world in the first place, that is how the world continues to turn, and is not changeable at human level of faith. That is, faith has already established the way the world turns, and there is little the human-level believer can do except to experience it...or to completely reject every part of it. You can't accept some parts of the world, and reject others. Over time, you will experience it all. Salvation is about shortening that experience and bringing it to an end.

Technically, Christiaints are striving for re-incarnation, despite protests that it is not a phenomenon that can be experienced. Resurrection, to them, is when they get their body back. Re-incarnation is the net effect of that kind of belief. You do get your body back, but it just won't look like the old one, and you mostly won't remember the old one, and the new one just won't last as long as you hoped before it get's recycled again...and again....

Technically, bodily experience does last forever, until, or unless it is disbelieved. The only way to disbelieve it is to know what is true instead. It's not even enough to believe what is true...one must know it.

What is true is that there are no male or female in Christ. In other words, there is no bodily experience when one is experiencing the Truth as one's Self. The Self is Spirit, so-to-speak. Or some combination of Spirit/Mind. It is not balanced with a body. That is not "balance".

Since you do believe in incarnation (the flesh), you will experience all aspects of that phenomenon, given enough time. Re-appearing (in some kind of personality package) is part of that phenomenon. You're appearance in the flesh is the evidence that you do believe in incarnation.

Any religion which does not clearly explain the way to cease and desist re-appearances, and advocate for the full renunciation of the world, is not serving the salvation of Christ. Rather, it is serving the salvation of the flesh.

This is an example of renouncing the world: neither incarnation, nor re-incarnation are true. Both are equally a false perception based on self-deception. No part of the world is true, neither the beginning of time, nor the end of time. Planets are not true. Galaxies are false. Stars are liars. Stars do not emit real "light" nor impart any real knowledge. Humans do not have souls which can be saved. They have egos which can be perpetuated over time.

Only Christ has a soul worth saving. An ego is a somewhat invisible phenomenon which feels most at home in what i would call a personality package, which would be some kind of "balance" between spirit-mind-body. Body is what expresses an ego's ideology the best. This explains why as long as ego persists, it will always be endeavoring to reappear on a body of sorts. At the end of the day, even an ego is false, itself a product of faith. All phenomenon supported by faith will eventually disappear from one's experience. The ego must be renounced for Christ to be saved.
 
Last edited:
"it's not a required article of faith that you need in order for Christ to be saved."??

I assume you mean it is not a requirement of salvation to accept Christ, to believe in Jesus, to believe he is Divine, died on the cross for your sins and rose from dead.

That of course, is 100% wrong. It is the opposite of what Jesus said.
Indeed is the actual definition of being a Christian.

Without believing in Jesus, accepting the Divine Gift of Mercy through sending his son to be a way of salvation for whose who believe in him, dying for us on the cross, bringing Jesus in your heart and turning away from your old life and following Jesus's teachings one cannot pass from death to life. You MUST be spiritually reborn.

So long posts by someone, you, who cares so little that he can't be bothered to even read the 4 gospels (Matthew Mark Luke and John) is so sad. Loving your own ego more that God will not bring the way.

You love to argue no-so-Good-1.
  • Fools love their own foolishness (Proverbs)
  • Better that you should have a millstone around your neck and be tossed into the sea than you should lead one of these little ones astray.
  • I am the way, the truth and the light and none shall enter the kingdom except by me.
More than wasting time you lead the little ones astray.

Bless you and goodbye​
 
Never has been. The claim that only a priest can forgive sins is totally antithetical to biblical truth. So is the claim that one must confess to a priest for sins to be forgiven, the Bible states numerous times that only Jesus can forgive sins and took upon our sin on our behalf. That alone completely disqualifies catholicism as a Christian belief. Neither is Mary in any way holy, nor can sins be absolved through monetary contributions, nor should physical violence be condoned in any way to convince others of one's belief. Ironically the Catholic Church gets quieter and quieter on the issues of abortion, homosexuality, and past wrongs toward boys and indigenous folk. Funny sect.

Yes MW you are completely correct.

The first video simply and respectfully pointed out why Catholicism was never Christianity.

And though I doubt anyone watched the video, the person (a pastor) went to great lengths in the introduction to be polite and respectful.

I think those who like to argue miss out on the potential value of the thread - which is for our Catholic friends.

Christians are only required to let everyone know what the Gospel is, (the Good news is).

The gift of free will means anyone can accept or reject the Divine gift by God of his son, Jesus. The key is Catholic Church does not tell people what the Gospel is and so blocks people learning of the gift and having the opportunity for salvation.

Thank-you for your post.
 
Why Do Some Assert That Catholics Are Not Christians?
Being a Christian is not based on anything except placing faith in Jesus and accepting Him as your Savior and Lord. If a person believes this, then they are a Christian, and nobody can take that away from them.

Vivian Bricker Contributing Writer Sep 01, 2022
27214-istockgetty-images-plusjarino47-1_source_file.jpg


The topic of Catholics not being true Christians has been a difficult topic for many decades to address. Due to the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church, many denominations argue that Catholics are not Christians.

This type of assertion is not biblical, as we cannot know a person's heart as God can. As believers, we do not need to judge others based on their denomination.

Discussing Catholicism
Catholicism has many unbiblical practices and teachings, such as purgatory, sacraments, and the rosary, yet this does not mean a person is not a Christian.

A person becomes a Christian by placing faith in Christ by believing that He died for their sin, was buried, and rose again (John 3:16-17; Romans 10; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

If a person accepts Jesus as their Savior and Lord, then they are a true Christian. It doesn't matter if that person attends a Catholic Church, a Baptist Church, a Methodist Church, or a Moravian Church.

In other words, it doesn't matter what denomination a person is a part of, but rather if they have placed faith in Christ. Placing faith in Jesus is the only way a person is a Christian.

Therefore, a Catholic can be a Christian if they have placed faith in Christ as their Savior and Lord. This does not mean their theology is perfect because much of Catholicism is not biblically based.

Teachings such as purgatory, sacraments, and praying the rosary are teachings and beliefs within Catholicism — not the true Word of God. The theology of Catholics is skewed, yet they can still be true Christians if they have placed faith in Jesus as their Savior and Lord.
What I just read, as the thread title header.... is the most stupid binary argument of all time.

We have one of ET's in-house thumpers criticizing one religion and saying "this one is not real"

I mean wtf?!.... is this click-bait? Hey Aquarius.... >>>>>forest for the trees here bro. Whatever religion you think is the "right Christianity" ... is no more right than folks worshiping trees in the Amazon rain-forest. Just so ya know. :rolleyes::banghead:
 
...The key is Catholic Church does not tell people what the Gospel is and so blocks people learning of the gift and having the opportunity for salvation.

Thank-you for your post.

Maybe true in your neighborhood but not true in Catholic churches in Quebec, South France, and Chicago. Usually, it's discussed in mass and/or divine liturgy.

Yet, I've been to mass in other locations and what you write is true. My point, location location location, and the priest of the mass.

With that said, opportunities for salvation...very complex (do a lot of work towards God) within Catholicism in comparison to other religions.

Christians only need faith while Catholics need much more than faith. I joke by saying Catholics need to read more books than most other religions need to read.

Regardless...

Roman Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Roman Catholics is another saying. Factually, only about 60% - 65% of Christians are Catholics.

Catholics-Christians-Differences.png


Image Source: https://www.diffen.com/difference/Catholicism_vs_Christianity

wrbtrader
 
Back
Top