The Town of Odyssey

This has been really annoying me for a long time and I am sure it annoys other Catholics to. Someone asks a question like this, "do you think that Catholics are Christians?" They reply "No." First person responds "Why?" then "Because they believe in worshiping people besides God". This answer is totally incorrect and a assumption based on only an 1/8 of the facts. Please if you aren't sure about something that another person believes or even if your only pretty ask first, their are a few knowledgeable Catholics who will clarify their beliefs for you. Ask yourself this would you like it if someone said, "I don't believe Protestants are Christians because they think that you can do drugs, murder people, and do a whole bunch of other stuff and still go to heaven. Anyway this is not directed at anyone in particular so just please clarify before posting an assumption.

I second Jehoshaphat's message, there are Q&A threads in the Second Church area for a reason. So people can clarify other people's beliefs and learn about them. And as Jehoshaphat says, consider how you would feel if someone else made assumptions about your beliefs.

Or, at the very least, don't portray your assumtions as fact.

Because they obviously been reading some good'ol Chick tracts (jking): http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1071/1071_01.asp

I kid you not, on my Christmas road trip to visit my cousins in texas with my dad, we stopped by to a nearby gas station next to a lutheran church, which one of their volunteers was giving these tracts out for free. When one of them asked my dad if he was Catholic (which he is) they automatically gave him the piece that I just linked to. We both had some good laughs, until I just did some research and found out that this wasn't a parody but him really believing in this nonsense.

Chick tracts are the greatest thing ever. How else would I know that all Christian rock groups literally sell their soul to Satan?

You are kidding right?

Top never kids he is literally serious all the time. In fact I have never seen him make a joke, ever.

And of course Jack Chick tracts are the greatest how else would we learn that Satan created the Catholic church and that the Catholic church created Islam?

I must admit, that tract did crack me up a little. I mean, a honest anti-Catholic historian could refute a lot of that!

Or worse yet, how would we know that every Bible we read, except for the Authorized 1611 King James Version, is a book straight from the devil, compiled by devilish scholars whose main goal was to corrupt Scripture and totally change it so that Satan will be glorified and heretical doctrines will be exalted?! See this tract.

And also, we would never be warned that all evolutionists are flaming mad people who want nothing better than to corrupt our minds with their fiendish lies. But, a barely-educated high school student can bring them to their knees in repentance and surrender by disproving just a few arguments. See that tract here.

Seriously. I don't understand how they expect to get the Gospel to really stick in people's minds when they do so much tearing down of other people in order to get to it. I can be guilty of adding things to the Gospel myself at times, but these people do it as a rule; they seem to like nothing better than tearing down every single thing that they disagree with--no matter how historically inaccurate they have to be in order to do so.

gunblader3 wrote:Because they obviously been reading some good'ol Chick tracts (jking): http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1071/1071_01.asp

I kid you not, on my Christmas road trip to visit my cousins in texas with my dad, we stopped by to a nearby gas station next to a lutheran church, which one of their volunteers was giving these tracts out for free. When one of them asked my dad if he was Catholic (which he is) they automatically gave him the piece that I just linked to. We both had some good laughs, until I just did some research and found out that this wasn't a parody but him really believing in this nonsense.

I do have a question for you, since your dad is Catholic (note that I'm clarifying what I heard, so I don't spread unfound rumors. ).

I have an aquantance who is (or atleast claims to be) Catholic... He says that there are many Saints that you can pray to, for different things. That, in and of itself, doesn't bother me too much, but then he goes on to say that if you're trying to sell your house, you just pray to this certain Saint, and bury a statue of this Saint in the yard of the house you're trying to sell, and it will sell faster...
Is this a true statement?

I hope I don't offend you by saying this (if it is indeed true), but it just seems a little silly to me...
(Though, I guess you could say a lot of what I believe seems silly as well).

Coming from an Eastern Orthodox view that has similar beliefs about prayers to the saint let me say this. Yes there are people in our faith traditions who believe those things and act like that. This is not backed by the church or most of the clergy. The people who believe as such though are to us as those who believe the jabez prayer will give them everything are to Protestants. There will always be those who treat prayer as a vending machine and they shouldn't be taken seriously no matter which faith tradition they cling to

Good, looks like even other Christians believe that Jack Chick is full of baloney.

@Jcgj: Don't have to worry about offending others if your question is a legitimate one. Anyways I'm not a Catholic (nor am I religious at all) but I can say that it sounds awfully a lot like superstition these "Catholics" are doing.

John answered it correctly, there will always be people who treat prayer like a vending machine. Expecting God to do what man wants instead of man doing what God wants. (speaking from an Ex-Catholic point of view)

Ok, yeah that's pretty much of what I was thining, but I figured I'd clarify first.

jasonjannajerryjohn wrote:Ironic that Catholics are getting the "not Christian" treatment quite a bit nowadays when they were the first Christians.

I think that honour would actually belong to the Jewish people, wouldn't it? Most of the early believers were Jewish, dating back to Jesus' time on earth.

Catspaw wrote:

jasonjannajerryjohn wrote:Ironic that Catholics are getting the "not Christian" treatment quite a bit nowadays when they were the first Christians.

I think that honour would actually belong to the Jewish people, wouldn't it? Most of the early believers were Jewish, dating back to Jesus' time on earth.

The first Christians were Jewish, meaning they converted to Christianity. So the Jewish people, meaning the children of Israel, were not Christians, but some people who were Jewish were among the first believers.
What JJJJ was referring to was the teaching that Catholicism is the religion Jesus established, and converting to early Christianity was converting to Catholicism. In that view, it is indeed very ironic that people would question the Christianity of Catholics, as Christian means follower of Christ and they were the ones that first followed him, in converting to the Church he founded.

bookworm wrote:

Catspaw wrote:

jasonjannajerryjohn wrote:Ironic that Catholics are getting the "not Christian" treatment quite a bit nowadays when they were the first Christians.

I think that honour would actually belong to the Jewish people, wouldn't it? Most of the early believers were Jewish, dating back to Jesus' time on earth.

The first Christians were Jewish, meaning they converted to Christianity. So the Jewish people, meaning the children of Israel, were not Christians, but some people who were Jewish were among the first believers.
What JJJJ was referring to was the teaching that Catholicism is the religion Jesus established, and converting to early Christianity was converting to Catholicism. In that view, it is indeed very ironic that people would question the Christianity of Catholics, as Christian means follower of Christ and they were the ones that first followed him, in converting to the Church he founded.

If one were to choose to define things that way, then one could say that.

In other words, you don't believe a word of it.

She may have been referring to the first part.

I was gonna make a really sarcastic post. Buuuuttttt.

I decided not to.