Two thoughts come to mind regarding your statement above, Page Blitzkrieg:
1) How did it come to be that you were raised as a Catholic without any form of indoctrination from a priest or any member of the clergy? I've a number of younger Catholic relatives who were taught some of the precepts of their faith before receiving their first Holy Communion. Wasn't this the same case with you?
2) I wholeheartedly agree that doctors do not cut the body during surgery in order to hurt the patient but rather to heal them. However, any surgeon worth their salt (so to speak) knows that it is not always necessary to cut a patient's body to heal them.
How did you reach the conclusion that the removal of Christ's name from the Roman Catholic Church was the result of an apostasy? Is the deletion of Christ's name proof positive that the Roman Catholic Church underwent an apostasy regarding Christ's teachings?
This may sound flippant but--by the same token--does the act of replacing the name "Shoemart" with "SM" mean that all SM Supermalls should no longer be selling shoes? Or that the quality of all the shoes that they sell should be considered suspect?
Another example closer to home, as it were: most (if not all) of the members of the Espiya Republic use names other than our legal names in order to identify ourselves here. By doing so, would it then be correct to say that none of us hold true to the beliefs that we abide by every day of of our lives whenever we're logged onto the Republic?
I like the way you post in this thread, not like others who just mock and insult their fellowmen... for that
1) How did it come to be that you were raised as a Catholic without any form of indoctrination from a priest or any member of the clergy? I've a number of younger Catholic relatives who were taught some of the precepts of their faith before receiving their first Holy Communion. Wasn't this the same case with you?
-compared to INC, first they exposed the word of God in public. ("grand evangelical mission") then, they asked me to come for doctrine,,, (indoctrination, note i also ask their minister and sometimes i open some debate, but instead of laughing at me and mock me at my beliefs, they just smile and read the bible) then, it is now up to your "own" decision if you would like to continue or not.. may mga kasabay din ako, i think they're 12 years old, and also have the ability to understand... i think if you really want to come inside or be a member to the church, it will take half a year to become a member (baptized) this procedure is indeed written in the bible:
"15 And he said to them, “
Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16
Whoever believes and is
baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
With my respect to my former church,,, How can a baby understand the doctrine? i was baptized not knowing the truth "First"... i have no choice, then years later, i had my confession on our parish church, he just told me that my sins are now cleansed and i am ready to take my first communion.... at school, meron ding bible study right? tinatawanan pa nga namin mga iglesia kasi d sila kasali,,, but when i became mature enough, it reminds me, ang itinuturo lang noon is mga santo, the church, about how many books were there in the bible, what composes the bible, and also pinapasaulo ung rosary and mga dasal...no bible verses, ni hindi manlang ako nagbabasa nun..
2) I wholeheartedly agree that doctors do not cut the body during surgery in order to hurt the patient but rather to heal them. However, any surgeon worth their salt (
so to speak) knows that it is not always necessary to cut a patient's body to heal them.
- i agree,,, but my point here is, with respect to you, for example, the patient has finished all medications, therapies and there is no other choice but to have a surgical operation, is the doctor's main objective is to hurt the patient? he wants that person to be saved... right? but if that patient refuses, could he himself save his own life?
With regards to the name of the real church... i think it is more acceptable the former name of the church (Church of Christ) rather than "La Iglesia católica apostólica romana" or "Roman Catholic Church". Why? because who owns the church? it is Christ isn't it? He Built it, and it is more justifiable to call the church after his Name... for example, you bought a land with title... do you want that lot will be named to other? for example, my name is Juan Dela Cruz, and i bought the lot, then the title of that lot was named: Pedro Dela Cruz... i will refuse to buy that lot, because I am not Pedro? i am Juan.. i wish you got my point,,,
The bible also support that it should be called in such a way because it is written:
“Christ is the head of the church, which is his body.†(Colossians 1:18, New Living Translation)
Respecting the the bliefs of others, here is my research about the term Church: The word “church†was derived from the Greek word “ekklesia,†thus, “Church of Christ†is “Ekklesia tou Christou†in Greek.
in addition to that:
“The Greek term ekklesia is built upon the root of the verb kaleo meaning to ‘call.’ The ekklesia, then is the assembly or congregation called together.
“The Church, therefore, is more than an aggregation – people who choose to come together. It is a congregation – people who have been called together by the the Word of God…†(Shelly, Bruce L. What is the Church? Wheaton, Illinois, USA: Victor Books, 1978, p. p.20.)
