What is the best demonimation? Catholic? Protestant? Moved from BC

[Gauntlet]

Just to clarify, I am Roman Catholic now, but I have many protestant friends and they are always trying to convert me.

I'm Catholic as well!

But since I'm now part of a nominally Baptist congregation which doesn't seem to be hung-up on denominations, I consider myself a non-denominational Christian with Roman Catholic roots. It seems that both camps (Catholic & Protestant) have their own independant and mutually exclusive criteria for why they are on the "right" side of things. Since I am not God, I don't know who is really "right" or "wrong."

I don't think God would be pleased with how Catholics & Protestants have had this bitter blood-feud going on for so long ...

[jesuslover1968]

I'm Catholic as well!

But since I'm now part of a nominally Baptist congregation which doesn't seem to be hung-up on denominations, I consider myself a non-denominational Christian with Roman Catholic roots. It seems that both camps (Catholic & Protestant) have their own independant and mutually exclusive criteria for why they are on the "right" side of things. Since I am not God, I don't know who is really "right" or "wrong."

I don't think God would be pleased with how Catholics & Protestants have had this bitter blood-feud going on for so long ...

We don't have to be God to know His will. That is what the Bible is for. You gave yourself the answer in your own post.
If two groups of people are feuding over who is the right denomination, then they are both wrong. The actual fault lies in thinking or believing that one of them MUST be right. When the True Church was created, there were no denominations at all. If we modeled after the 1st century Church, we would all be of one accord...as the professing Church is definately NOT of one accord, then all of them are wrong and what we consider the Church has to be reconsidered. The true Church is united in their BELIEF in Jesus Christ. Their faith in Him, their obedience to Him...their RENEWED life in Him. Anything else is an imposter...
Divisions in the professing church are just divisions caused by men who can't agree with one another, but what Jesus began, no one can end...His Word is Truth...He is the Way, the Truth and the Life...no one can come to the Father except through Him...anything else is a lie...deception. Being a part of any one denomination will NOT save you. Only Jesus can do that. The Catholic church, and most of the protestant churches are built by men, just buildings with lots of people in them. The Real Church is a group of people made into one IN CHRIST. Most denominational churches have their own agendas, beliefs and requirements...that were made and kept by men, not God. We find the TRUE CHURCH in HIS WORD but most importantly, in HIM...not in a denomination. God Bless.

[Gauntlet]

Could it be possible that both Catholicism and Protestantism are wrong?

That is entirely possible. The denominations as we know them today are, after all, a relatively recent fracture-pattern in what was orginally a unified whole. The early church was the pure germ, and now we have endless mutations.

[Izdaari]

Consider the following verses, also by Paul.

It stands to reason that we should be seeking sound doctrines.

Yes, I'm with you there. We should indeed be seeking sound doctrine. What I'm saying is that if you add to the criteria for salvation beyond what's clearly given, that isn't sound doctrine.

[Psalms Fan]

I joined the Orthodox Church back in 2005. Due to some sin, I left, but then repented and came back, and that is where I am now.

I'm not here to try to talk you into Orthodoxy (I'd much rather that you go where you most fully find Christ, wherever that may be), but I would at least you encourage you to not ignore history.

What it eventually came down to for me was a few factors:

-The New Testament wasn't written in a vacuum, nor was it first received in a vacuum. Rather it was written by and received into a community of believers in a particular time with a particular set of beliefs and with a particular set of practices.

-The New Testament is not the only thing that was written by Christians in the first century. There are people who learned at the feet of Christ and the apostles who had a lot to say about how that community would have understood the New Testament (not just "would have", but "did" understand it).

- Were those beliefs and practices lost to antiquity, or was there historic continuity between the beliefs and practices of the first century church and the church today?

There was more to it than just that for me, but that more or less sums things up.

www.scoba.us (SCOBA is The Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas) is a neat site, and the website for the Orthodox Church in America, www.oca.org has some really good info.

[decrumpit]

I have always been confused by this. Especially between Catholicism and Protestantism. Which one is the right path?

Also, what about Orthodoxy or the Mormons?

I'm going to break with what a lot of people are saying, but I do think that the traditions stemming from the Protestant Reformation are the soundest expression of Christianity.

The Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, Mormons, etc. all have serious flaws in their theology.

According to the Catholic hierarchy and advanced theology (NOT the majority of lay Catholics, who are my brothers and sisters ), I'm quite dammed. Same with those other groups, although the Mormons, by some strange twist of theology, can pray me into heaven if a descendant of mine becomes Mormon.

I take Catholicism seriously, and I respect it. For many years, I wanted to be a Catholic. But when you start reading the decisions of the councils (read all their deliberations as well as encyclicals - they're binding on you! ) and advanced Catholic theology, you start to get the feeling that the "true Catholics" are so few and far between that heaven will be a strange, lonely place. The Catholic church also relies more on Tradition (essentially an escape clause for any doctrine, such as the Immaculate Conception that lacks support in the early Church and Bible) that also feels the need to damn me if I decide to dissent from one of their "non-negotiables".

Now, the arguments against the Protestants (Ooooooh but you have 30,000 denominations!) are all valid and true. But when it comes to giving people the freedom to dissent (purely a Protestant invention), a tolerance for bizarre viewpoints comes with it. I personally prefer this autonomy over the strange dogmatism of the Catholics and Orthodox. Sure, its not "historical" but nobody said that Christ's message was perfectly understandable at the time and no further development was necessary. We're still trying to understand what this man 2000 years ago did and how he impacted the world. I'm not going to live by yesterday's human creedal formulations. I live by the Bible, and nothing but the Bible.

[Jerome1]

They should all duke it out and let the winner decide.

[Jerome1]

Just to clarify, I am Roman Catholic now, but I have many protestant friends and they are always trying to convert me.

Did you recently convert i thought i seen you post on here before?

I take Catholicism seriously, and I respect it. For many years, I wanted to be a Catholic. But when you start reading the decisions of the councils (read all their deliberations as well as encyclicals - they're binding on you! )

Encyclicals aren't binding, it is pretty complicated what is binding and what is not.

[fuzzi]

I'm rather partial to a church that teaches/preaches from the Bible, God's word.

Denominations tend to add 'stuff' that isn't in the Bible.

"Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)

[decrumpit]

Encyclicals aren't binding, it is pretty complicated what is binding and what is not.

According to the CC, what is binding and what is not?

[Mr King]

Before there were Catholics, and before there were Protestants, there was Jesus and the 12 disciples.

Jesus said 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me' - John 14:16 (NIV)

I believe this is the right path.


Chad.

I agree with this but that doesn't mean that I'm saying all denominations are wrong but wouldn't agree with all denominations. I wouldn't dare to declare a denomination to be set above Jesus' Words that Chad has provided. Of course there are false christian groups, cults, to be aware of such as; christian-psychology, christian-science, mormonism.

You should read Ephesians Chapter 4.
Ephesians 4:1-6 Walk in Unity
I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

[Jerome1]

According to the CC, what is binding and what is not?

Decrees promulgated by ecumenical councils in union with the pope are binding to my knowledge. Also the pope can act on his own when defining a doctrine, but this has only been done twice i think(for the immaculate conception and the assumption of Mary).

Encyclicals are different i think because they have changed in nature down through the centuries.

[decrumpit]

Decrees promulgated by ecumenical councils in union with the pope are binding to my knowledge. Also the pope can act on his own when defining a doctrine, but this has only been done twice i think(for the immaculate conception and the assumption of Mary).

Encyclicals are different i think because they have changed in nature down through the centuries.

It's easy to know scripture. Tradition, however, is different. If something is mentioned in enough encyclicals, it becomes tradition. Such has been the case with contraception. It's kind of a fuzzy area, which makes me doubtful as to its ability to define truth.

[Jerome1]

It's easy to know scripture. Tradition, however, is different. If something is mentioned in enough encyclicals, it becomes tradition. Such has been the case with contraception. It's kind of a fuzzy area, which makes me doubtful as to its ability to define truth.

It is taught explicitly that contraception is a sin. I think it is also implied in scripture, many people for example use God's punishment of Onan(Genesis38:8-10), to condemn masterbation.

[Izdaari]

It is taught explicitly that contraception is a sin. I think it is also implied in scripture, many people for example use God's punishment of Onan(Genesis38:8-10), to condemn masterbation.

Yes, people use the story of Onan for that, but only by misreading it. It's clear enough that Onan had been specifically been commanded by God to impregnate his widowed sister-in-law, as was the usual custom of his people, so that she wouldn't have to suffer the shame of being a childless widow (sounds weird, but their culture worked that way), and he disobeyed. Defiance of God was what he died for. The issues of contraception in general and masturbation in general are incidental to the story.

I'm sympathetic to some Catholic theology, but IMHO in this area the RCC teachings are weird and only arrived at by torturing the scriptures until they reach the desired conclusion, i.e. eisegesis.