I often hear catholics holler 'protestants, protestants!', ok- so what was Paul? There was no catholicism at the time (just regular paganism)- so are you telling me he wasn't of Christ?
Do you see how ridiculous this sounds now?
No religions necessary, no titles, no man-made structures- just faith in Jesus and His word to be a christian.
www.loveyouJesus.com
2007-07-28
20:39:02
·
6 answers
·
asked by
jesusisking51
2
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I have done a ton of research- the bible makes absolutely NO MENTION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
2007-07-29
05:40:17 ·
update #1
Paul a catholic? Now why would a believer in Christ Jesus teach people to pray to dead people?
2007-07-31
23:58:09 ·
update #2
Amen to that !!!
2007-07-29 11:03:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
*Is Catholic*
St. Paul is a Catholic. He wasn't a Protestant. If you check the teachings of St. Paul in the scriptures, they match the teachings of the Catholic Church, not the Protestants.
There was Catholicism at the time, it just didn't use the name "Catholic", that came much later. Remember one thing, it was the Pagan Romans who named Christianity "Christianity", the Christians named it "Catholicism" or the Universal Faith. This is clearly reflective of St. Paul's theology as he taught that the Gospels were to be preached as a universal faith, the only correct faith, and that all other "gentiles" had to come to the faith for salvation and that many of the gentile nations had some understanding of God but as the "unknown God", which he writes about in his letters.
Now see here is where you go on a VERY dangerous path. You seem not to understand what faith is. Faith is not hope, it is not trust. It is knowledge derived from a relationship with God. You cannot have a relationship with God if you do not have a religion because the meaning of "religion" are those ties and bonds by which an individual has a relationship with what they worship. So if you say all you need is his word to be a Christian, then it is very clear to me that you do not have possession of either the word or Christ. For if you did, you would be in a relationship with Christ and would be worshiping Christ.
Rather it is apparent that you are in a relationship with your own mind and your own thoughts of what you assume Christ to be like.
Let me suggest that you reflect on what exactly it takes to be in a relationship with God and the very specific structures and obligations that God has instituted, as recorded in part in scripture, so that we might truly enter into a relationship with Christ, be filled with the Spirit, and give proper worship to the Father.
2007-07-31 00:34:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Liet Kynes 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The idea that all revealed truth is to be found in "66 books" is not only not in Scripture, it is contradicted by Scripture (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 3:15, 2 Peter 1:20-21, 2 Peter 3:16).
To believe that the Bible is our only source of Christian Truth is unbiblical and illogical.
Our Lord founded a Church (Matthew 16:18-19), not a book, which was to be the pillar and ground of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15). We can know what this Church teaches by looking not only at Sacred Scripture, but into History and by reading what the earliest Christians have written, what those who've sat on the Chair of Peter have spoken consistently with Scripture and Tradition.
St Paul:
As he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin he was given at the time of his circumcision the name of Saul, which must have been common in that tribe in memory of the first king of the Jews (Philippians 3:5). As a Roman citizen he also bore the Latin name of Paul. It was quite usual for the Jews of that time to have two names, one Hebrew, the other Latin or Greek, between which there was often a certain assonance and which were joined together exactly in the manner made use of by St. Luke (Acts 13:9: Saulos ho kai Paulos). See on this point Deissmann, "Bible Studies" (Edinburgh, 1903, 313-17.) It was natural that in inaugurating his apostolate among the Gentiles Paul should have adopted his Roman name, especially as the name Saul had a ludicrous meaning in Greek.
As every respectable Jew had to teach his son a trade, young Saul learned how to make tents (Acts 18:3) or rather to make the mohair of which tents were made (cf. Lewin, "Life of St. Paul", I, London, 1874, 8-9). He was still very young when sent to Jerusalem to receive his education at the school of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Possibly some of his family resided in the holy city; later there is mention of the presence of one of his sisters whose son saved his life (Acts 23:16).
From that time it is absolutely impossible to follow him until he takes an active part in the martyrdom of St. Stephen (Acts 7:58-60; 22:20). He was then qualified as a young man (neanias), but this was very elastic appellation and might be applied to a man between twenty and forty.
After his conversion, his baptism, and his miraculous cure Paul set about preaching to the Jews (Acts 9:19-20)
Seek knowledge in Catholicism
2007-07-29 15:06:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Isabella 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes.
Paul was a Jewish convert to Christianity.
It is true that the bible does not mantion the words Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Anglican, Methodist, Lutheran, Adventist, Congregational, Nondeniominational, Mennonite, or Quaker. That does not mean that these bodies of believers are not Christian.
However the Church has referred to itself as the “Catholic Church” at least since 107 C.E. (about 10 years after the last book of the New Testament was written), when the Greek term "Katholikos" (meaning universal) appears in the Letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyrnaeans:
"Wherever the bishop appear, there let the multitude be; even as wherever Christ Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church."
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-hoole.html
We do not know how long they had been using the term "Catholic" before it was included in this letter.
All of this was long before the Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed from 325 C.E. which states, "We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07644a.htm
With love in Christ.
2007-07-29 22:37:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by imacatholic2 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
christ established a church, the catholic church compiled the bible,. the word catholic was first used by st. ignatias in roughly 107ad. the bible and writings of the early church fathers attest to the first christians being catholic, catholic coming from katholicos meaning universal. paganism was not the only thing around at the time period you mentioned either, you may wanna do some more research before making outlandish claims.
www.scripturecatholic.com
www.catholiceducation.org
www.fisheaters.com
www.askmeaboutgod.org
god bless.
2007-07-29 04:08:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by fenian1916 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Paul who?
2007-07-29 03:41:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by zytlaly 4
·
0⤊
0⤋