Should I claim to be a Catholic?

[EssentialSacrifice]

in my church today we are celebrating a special day for the unborn ...

The Day of Prayer for Legal Protection of the Unborn Children.

if you can, take the time to join in prayer for our most innocent of innocents .

[crochet1949]

In the New Testament -- there were no 'denominations' as such. The Protestant churches were in effect 'protesting' what the RCC was teaching. I'm a born-again believer 1st and Then a Baptist. But I wouldn't have been a Baptist because my parents started out as Presbyterians and then were invited to a Bible study and found out that the Bible teaches baptism by immersion and it is to represent that a person has already accepted Christ as personal Savior.
I'm thinking that in the New Testament there were two groups / Pharasees and the Sadducees. Jesus Christ appeared on the scene with teachings about God / the miracles that pointed people to the fact that there was More 'out there' than just people.
Everyone Needs to be around people who believe the same way. And the church group that teaches Bible / salvation / not of works is the one to go to.
Do Not claim to be something that you don't believe in.
Christianity is actually the answer -- what Jesus Christ has already done For 'us'. It's the relationship with God through Jesus Christ that a person is really looking for.

[Philip]

As for the very early, denomination-less churches, in practice, they were likely very similar in certain ways, as to how they conducted their assemblages, but as they spread, most certainly exhibited various cultural/regional differences, based upon certain things that naturally made them unique from each other. But the trouble with denominations actually began as traditions and individual local and specific churches' sensibilities began to nudge up against Scriptural specifics, so as that traditions and interpretations began to be confused with Scripture itself. After a period, many failed to see just where and how tradition had crept in, and how it sometimes had been blended with and also came to be perceived AS IF Scripture itself. I think a lack of literacy amongst many certainly allowed for the blurring of correct understandings between what was Scriptural and what was the mere traditions of man - as the less one could read and study Scripture for himself, the more likely they were to be swayed by the opinions of church leadership. Also, even for those literate, it's not as if they had a nice study Bible and concordance on their bookshelf, much less a Bible in a language they understood. This is why the Reformation exploded when it did - translations into the languages of the masses and printing presses suddenly made the Bible far more accessible to the common man, who was no longer nearly as dependent upon clergy to understand it/could study it for themselves. So, denominational differences began rather early.

[crochet1949]

Good points. And actually -- does a person really Need a study Bible. I have an older version NIV study Bible and decided to get a simple NIV -- Not even a concordance. All those extra notes are interesting -- but sometimes we forget that we Can read Scripture on our own without any helps. Outline a passage -- the 5 W's -- after reading the passage a few times - Then go to a commentary and see if you agree with it. We need to remember that commentaries are written by other human beings. Our own perspective of Scripture is just as good as theirs. A degree by a name means that they spent a lot of time studying --my husband has a MA in theology -- I don't -- but I've spent a lot of time studying, too. Precepts Bible studies. I also have two NKJ versions -- one has slightly bigger print for easier reading.

There are groups who practice foot washing and those that Don't. And it Is in Scripture. In one church a pastor was trying to explain why he did Not practice foot washing. Another church pastor had chosen several people to demonstrate exactly how foot washing could be done during a church service. So that is one way that two church groups would form -- possibly to avoid problems within the church.

As people take time to Read the Scriptures On our own --we learn a great deal.

[IceMobster]

the original question was;

Should I claim to be a Catholic if I do not see reason or believe in certain teachings presented by the Catholic Church?

his final answer was;

I just realized I shouldn't even call myself Christian, actually.

imo, the only reasonable answer at hand then is .... no

clever

IceMobster wrote:
I just realized I shouldn't even call myself Christian, actually

.

finally your reasonable answer was at hand.

Hey RockLobster,

Mind telling us what you mean?

I don't have faith. I have grasped the God with reason, but that is as far as my reason allows me to. Faith is non-existent.
It is not that I don't see sense in Catholicism so I've left the whole Christianity. It didn't happen over night.
Every time I think of an event in Jesus's life there is a doubt that says that it might didn't happen as described or at all because it has only one source(Bible).
Not to mention (I've known for this "argument" for a longer time, so it is not like I saw a picture on 101 Rise of Atheism or something (lel) and decided I don't want to be a Christian anymore) that if I was born some place else(or some other time), I would adhere to some other religion or belief system. How can I claim that Jesus is the right representation of that one Creator?
Christianity still does make the most sense to me (now I am not sure if this is because I was raised so or because of Jesus's life mentioned in the Bible) but I can't do it. I don't care what others think of me -- if I am a Christian or not -- I don't want to lie to myself.
I still pray (in the way of talking to God... in the way of saying I am sorry if He truly was incarnated through Jesus Christ, etc. so more or less everything I did before) and nothing pretty much changed apart from not accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour even though I write this with a heavy heart since if it is truth then I am doing a terrible mistake, but, I've been thinking about it and decided this is the best way.
You don't need to tell me that I should start reading the Bible. I am doing it, just not with faith "anymore" (I can't even say anymore because, looking back, I don't think I've ever believed - actually I don't know, I guess during primary school I truly did but, eh...)
As I said, I've been thinking about it (sometimes more, sometimes less) for a longer time, around 3 or 4 years.



On topic: I see it kinda logical that there is a Church (in this case CC) whose theologians and apologists interpret (even though I am aware certain people might interpret it different) the Bible in the best possible way (after discussion of course) and come out with a conclusion. If everyone interprets it differently, we get what we got (and are still getting) with the reformation.

[Kurieuo]

IceMobster.

I'd encourage you to get hold of a read a book called: The Universe Next Door by James W. Sire.

As for my own response to your last post, there a no neutral positions anywhere.
I mean, we come into a life full of uncertainty, not knowing where what we experience is illusory or a delusion.
Yet, we cling to explanations that seem the most "fitting". That appear to make the most sense of what we experience to be true. We do exist for example, because I just know I do given that I experience all that I do.
My memories are in fact true, because I have lived throughout life. Sure, things might be hazy here and there, but by and large my memories are due to real experiences that I went through. Right?
There is no real certainty, as far as knowledge in concerned.

Yet, I believe we can know truth -- we just can't absolutely know that we know it.
Hence why, even within science, knowledge is measured in terms of probability.

The best we have, is first accepting on a practical level that we do exist, can use logic and reason accurately, that we really do actually sense and experience a real world around us. From there, we can continue to build this coherent picture of the world that becomes bigger and bigger and creates a stable view of the world with all that we believe.

You've probably done this, and it got you to God and no further, yet. But now, what else seems to "fit" with what you just seem to intuitively believe and accept, or with what you would expect if God existed. Not what is true and can be proven with absolute certainty -- because the reality is nothing can because the judges of such are always subjective. But, what created the biggest island of coherency for you to stand upon. That I believe, can be found in much of what Christ revealed. He even claimed to be the Truth. What truth? The Truth that matters in life. (John 14:6)

You know, I don't have a time machine and can't go back and time, see baby Jesus in a manager, witness Christ healing this person and that person and scientifically test such to ensure Jesus wasn't a charlatan of some kind. I can't see Jesus crucified in person, hung up on the cross or really know such a man physically resurrected back to life.

BUT, the coherency of what Jesus taught. How it fills in many pieces of things I naturally quite believe to be true. What God would be like, given God exists as a logically necessary being -- being God is the source of everything that exists -- goodness, love, righteousness and the like -- the "fittingness" of how we might get to be with God. To me, there is nothing as coherent or together as a "belief system" than what Christianity presents, let alone a more fitting alternative.

And yes, I haven't proven Christ was true, but the island on which I stand at least coherently brings together that which I naturally believe is true with/without Christianity. So, maybe in the parts I can't prove, such is actually true too.

Anyway, if you don't mind reading, then get a hold of that book.
It's been around a while and I'm sure you'll enjoy the read.

[Philip]

Ice, if you REALLY and sincerely want to know if God exists, to discern precisely WHO He is, and whether or not He is Jesus, then why not cut through all of the opinions, quit trying to figure out what books to read, endless debates, and just put Him to a simple test? ASK Him to reveal Himself to you. Scripture tells us God wants ALL men to come to faith in Him, and so this means He WANTS you to know Him. And so if YOU sincerely want to know Him, why not put Him to a direct test? But ONLY if you truly want the truth, and realize the answer will come on HIS terms as to how and when He reveals Himself to you. If you do this, He WILL reveal Himself, perhaps in a way you wouldn't expect, and yet clearly so. As to how you will RESPOND is your responsibility.

Ice, have you done this? People so often make discovering God some grand, complicated equation they must first assemble every possible evidence, perfectly sift it, etc., etc. And while I well understand this approach, commend the endeavor as worthy and important, once one comes to the conclusion there must be something/Someone before and beyond us that explains reality, our need for the quest and endless debate, it's time to cut to the chase, to directly approach God, to see if He's really there AND Who He is. He is either there or He is not, no? If He is there, He either wants you to know and follow Him or not, right? And IF you truly want to know these answers, why would you not add this ultimate experiment to your search methodology?

Looking back, looking around, I can see we tend to make finding the truth of God far more complex than it need be. Again, this is not to diminish the importance of ways people seek, but for them to realize WE make it complicated due to OUR limitations in how much and as to what we can actually know. But that if God, as described in Scripture exists, then HE has no such limits, and He knows exactly how to and can make HIS truth far easier to find. Ice?

[IceMobster]

IceMobster.

As for my own response to your last post, there a no neutral positions anywhere.
I mean, we come into a life full of uncertainty, not knowing where what we experience is illusory or a delusion.
Yet, we cling to explanations that seem the most "fitting". That appear to make the most sense of what we experience to be true. We do exist for example, because I just know I do given that I experience all that I do.
My memories are in fact true, because I have lived throughout life. Sure, things might be hazy here and there, but by and large my memories are due to real experiences that I went through. Right?
There is no real certainty, as far as knowledge in concerned.

Yet, I believe we can know truth -- we just can't absolutely know that we know it.
Hence why, even within science, knowledge is measured in terms of probability.

The best we have, is first accepting on a practical level that we do exist, can use logic and reason accurately, that we really do actually sense and experience a real world around us. From there, we can continue to build this coherent picture of the world that becomes bigger and bigger and creates a stable view of the world with all that we believe.

You've probably done this, and it got you to God and no further, yet. But now, what else seems to "fit" with what you just seem to intuitively believe and accept, or with what you would expect if God existed. Not what is true and can be proven with absolute certainty -- because the reality is nothing can because the judges of such are always subjective. But, what created the biggest island of coherency for you to stand upon. That I believe, can be found in much of what Christ revealed. He even claimed to be the Truth. What truth? The Truth that matters in life. (John 14:6)

He didn't claim that. It is reported He had done so. See? I need to have faith in what is written and reason refutes that. That doesn't mean reason and faith are mutually exclusive (much like is being presented with science and religion), though, but this is on a personal level.

BUT, the coherency of what Jesus taught. How it fills in many pieces of things I naturally quite believe to be true. What God would be like, given God exists as a logically necessary being -- being God is the source of everything that exists -- goodness, love, righteousness and the like -- the "fittingness" of how we might get to be with God. To me, there is nothing as coherent or together as a "belief system" than what Christianity presents, let alone a more fitting alternative.

Yep:

Christianity still does make the most sense to me

I'd encourage you to get hold of a read a book called: The Universe Next Door by James W. Sire.

Is there a pdf version of the book?

Ice, if you REALLY and sincerely want to know if God exists, to discern precisely WHO He is, and whether or not He is Jesus, then why not cut through all of the opinions, quit trying to figure out what books to read, endless debates, and just put Him to a simple test? ASK Him to reveal Himself to you. Scripture tells us God wants ALL men to come to faith in Him, and so this means He WANTS you to know Him. And so if YOU sincerely want to know Him, why not put Him to a direct test? But ONLY if you truly want the truth, and realize the answer will come on HIS terms as to how and when He reveals Himself to you. If you do this, He WILL reveal Himself, perhaps in a way you wouldn't expect, and yet clearly so. As to how you will RESPOND is your responsibility.
Yeah, I am waiting for the revelation under His terms. I just hope I realize it is a revelation and not my imagination/dream/psychological thing



Ice, have you done this? People so often make discovering God some grand, complicated equation they must first assemble every possible evidence, perfectly sift it, etc., etc. And while I well understand this approach, commend the endeavor as worthy and important, once one comes to the conclusion there must be something/Someone before and beyond us that explains reality, our need for the quest and endless debate, it's time to cut to the chase, to directly approach God, to see if He's really there AND Who He is. He is either there or He is not, no? If He is there, He either wants you to know and follow Him or not, right? And IF you truly want to know these answers, why would you not add this ultimate experiment to your search methodology?
Have I done what? I realize it doesn't need to be a complicated equation and I do want to add this experiment to my search methodology, why of course! But, how do I do it without God initiating first?

[Jac3510]

Ice,

Out of curiosity, how much research have you done on the historicity of the resurrection of Christ? To be specific, can you tell me any articles or books you've read on the subject?

Thanks

[Philip]

Ice: Have I done what? I realize it doesn't need to be a complicated equation and I do want to add this experiment to my search methodology, why of course! But, how do I do it without God initiating first?

First, God ALREADY has made you generally aware that He must exist. Plus, He's given us His word. You have a voice, don't you? USE it, initiate with Him what you NEED to know, as that might be somewhat different from what YOU think you need to believe. ASK Him the important questions on your heart, concerning Him. Be BOLD! Tell Him you need more than subtle, because you REALLY want to know the truth of the matter. He knows exactly what you need. You have absolutely NOTHING to lose - He's either there or He's not, correct? Find out! If you sincerely ask, then I can guarantee you He wants you to know about Himself! I'll pray for you to do this. There should be absolutely no credible reason not to! And He'll know as to whether you are sincere in approaching Him.

[Kurieuo]

IceMobster.

As for my own response to your last post, there a no neutral positions anywhere.
I mean, we come into a life full of uncertainty, not knowing where what we experience is illusory or a delusion.
Yet, we cling to explanations that seem the most "fitting". That appear to make the most sense of what we experience to be true. We do exist for example, because I just know I do given that I experience all that I do.
My memories are in fact true, because I have lived throughout life. Sure, things might be hazy here and there, but by and large my memories are due to real experiences that I went through. Right?
There is no real certainty, as far as knowledge in concerned.

Yet, I believe we can know truth -- we just can't absolutely know that we know it.
Hence why, even within science, knowledge is measured in terms of probability.

The best we have, is first accepting on a practical level that we do exist, can use logic and reason accurately, that we really do actually sense and experience a real world around us. From there, we can continue to build this coherent picture of the world that becomes bigger and bigger and creates a stable view of the world with all that we believe.

You've probably done this, and it got you to God and no further, yet. But now, what else seems to "fit" with what you just seem to intuitively believe and accept, or with what you would expect if God existed. Not what is true and can be proven with absolute certainty -- because the reality is nothing can because the judges of such are always subjective. But, what created the biggest island of coherency for you to stand upon. That I believe, can be found in much of what Christ revealed. He even claimed to be the Truth. What truth? The Truth that matters in life. (John 14:6)

He didn't claim that. It is reported He had done so. See? I need to have faith in what is written and reason refutes that. That doesn't mean reason and faith are mutually exclusive (much like is being presented with science and religion), though, but this is on a personal level.

You've missed the boat I was sailing here.
Consider your comments below that Christianity still makes the most sense.
Well you know it seems kind of coherent to believe Christianity was actually founded by a man, a Rabbi, called Christ.
We can look at historical texts and well, the explanation seems reasonable that a man existed called Christ and that this person appears wise to the people on was known for doing miracles. Extra-Scriptural sources.
And then well, it seems to explain, how this belief system called Christianity arose out of Judaism.

Another hypothesis I read, is that Christ was actually an alien from outer space.
Mary was abducted and impregnated and Jesus was born, who was really an alien.
This explains his resurrection (i.e., some powerful healing technology) and Jesus' ascension.
Right? To many it has all the same mythical sounds elements perhaps as how the Gospel tells it.

But, to me, it kind of lacks explanatory power and coherency.
So you know, I can't prove what Christ actually said -- and indeed the exact words seem to differ from one Gospel to the next. But you know, the similarities and the like, doesn't mean the gist isn't there. Jesus claimed many things, and it also creates a coherent story with why the Jewish Sanhedrin would have been pissed. Blasphemy. False prophets were to be put to death. And so the story goes, the Jewish leaders took Jesus and made fun of his blasphemous claims, then took him to Pilate to request his execution (which they couldn't legally do of their own accord under Roman rule) and Pilate handed Jesus off to the people to make their decision.

Anyway, yes you could reject such. Like I said nothing can be proven with absolute certainty.
For example, how do you know your rational faculties and as such your reasoning ability is correctly functioning?
You don't need to answer that unless you want to and think you can prove your reasoning ability. However, I fear you'll end up going around in circles, quite literally circular.

BUT, the coherency of what Jesus taught. How it fills in many pieces of things I naturally quite believe to be true. What God would be like, given God exists as a logically necessary being -- being God is the source of everything that exists -- goodness, love, righteousness and the like -- the "fittingness" of how we might get to be with God. To me, there is nothing as coherent or together as a "belief system" than what Christianity presents, let alone a more fitting alternative.

Yep:

Christianity still does make the most sense to me

That's good, I think.

I'd encourage you to get hold of a read a book called: The Universe Next Door by James W. Sire.

Is there a pdf version of the book?

No, I'm not sure, but it is on Kindle.
If you don't wish to buy a copy, but are really interested and would read, then I could look into getting a copy for you.
Have a read of a bit of it on Amazon or the like, let me know if it sounds like something you would be interested to read.

[IceMobster]

Anyway, yes you could reject such. Like I said nothing can be proven with absolute certainty.
For example, how do you know your rational faculties and as such your reasoning ability is correctly functioning?
You don't need to answer that unless you want to and think you can prove your reasoning ability. However, I fear you'll end up going around in circles, quite literally circular.

It is rational and reasonable to find out that there is a Creator (as seen in Ancient Greece and later on).
Why would my reasoning ability malfunction? It is my opinion, after all.
How would you prove your reasoning ability?
Well, then, I'll spin in circles until God decides to stop that and prove (to me, of course) His incarnation through Jesus Christ, I guess.

[IceMobster]

Ice,

Out of curiosity, how much research have you done on the historicity of the resurrection of Christ? To be specific, can you tell me any articles or books you've read on the subject?

Thanks

I didn't do much research on it. I am aware of the Christian and non-Christian writing concerning Jesus Christ, but that only explains that Jesus existed - not that He resurrected.

Ice: Have I done what? I realize it doesn't need to be a complicated equation and I do want to add this experiment to my search methodology, why of course! But, how do I do it without God initiating first?

First, God ALREADY has made you generally aware that He must exist. Correct
Plus, He's given us His word. Correct
You have a voice, don't you? USE it, initiate with Him what you NEED to know, as that might be somewhat different from what YOU think you need to believe. ASK Him the important questions on your heart, concerning Him. Be BOLD! Tell Him you need more than subtle, because you REALLY want to know the truth of the matter. He knows exactly what you need. You have absolutely NOTHING to lose - He's either there or He's not, correct? Find out! If you sincerely ask, then I can guarantee you He wants you to know about Himself! I'll pray for you to do this. There should be absolutely no credible reason not to! And He'll know as to whether you are sincere in approaching Him. What you explained is a prayer - talking with God. I am doing it...

[Jac3510]

Ice,

Out of curiosity, how much research have you done on the historicity of the resurrection of Christ? To be specific, can you tell me any articles or books you've read on the subject?

Thanks

I didn't do much research on it. I am aware of the Christian and non-Christian writing concerning Jesus Christ, but that only explains that Jesus existed - not that He resurrected.

Then may I just suggest that you spend some significant time on that. I'll give you the bottom line here:

The resurrection of Christ is as certain as absolutely anything we know about from the ancient world. I'm not exaggerating here. Do you believe Caesar crossed the Rubicon? Do you believe Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliette? Do you think that George Washington was the first POTUS? Do you believe the Napoleon existed and built an empire?

If so, then using exactly the same historical criteria, then the resurrection of Christ absolutely must be affirmed as a historical reality. And, of course, if Jesus rose from the dead, then that changes nothing short of everything.

[IceMobster]

Ice,

Out of curiosity, how much research have you done on the historicity of the resurrection of Christ? To be specific, can you tell me any articles or books you've read on the subject?

Thanks

I didn't do much research on it. I am aware of the Christian and non-Christian writing concerning Jesus Christ, but that only explains that Jesus existed - not that He resurrected.

Then may I just suggest that you spend some significant time on that. I'll give you the bottom line here:

The resurrection of Christ is as certain as absolutely anything we know about from the ancient world. I'm not exaggerating here. Do you believe Caesar crossed the Rubicon? Do you believe Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliette? Do you think that George Washington was the first POTUS? Do you believe the Napoleon existed and built an empire?

If so, then using exactly the same historical criteria, then the resurrection of Christ absolutely must be affirmed as a historical reality. And, of course, if Jesus rose from the dead, then that changes nothing short of everything.

Except for the thing that the events you mentioned before the rising from the dead are logical and reasonable. The latter is not.