Catholicism vs. Biblical Christianity

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Consider the following basic Christian concepts...
  1. God exists.
  2. God is personal, living, moral, and rational.
  3. God created the world and created mankind in His image.
  4. There is objective right and wrong, rooted in God's nature.
  5. Humans have free will and moral responsibility.
  6. Sin is a personal, moral choice that results in spiritual death.
  7. We are not born guilty; guilt comes from our own sin.
  8. Jesus Christ is the incarnate Logos who died and rose again to offer life.
  9. Salvation is by grace and requires a free, personal response of trust and faith.
  10. Believers live in ongoing relationship with God through faith, love, and obedience.

Those ten points should be accepted universally by anyone who believes in BIBLICAL Christianity. The degree to which one diverges from them is the degree to which one’s theology has been influenced by extra-biblical traditions, philosophical distortions, or human systems of thought rather than the plain reading of Scripture and sound reason.

So where are the Catholics in this regard?

Points 1-3: I'd have to say that there's no appreciable divergence at all on these points. They seem to affirm all three.

Points 4-5: Here is where their divergence begins:
Catholicism officially affirms free will and moral accountability, but it also introduces the idea of "concupiscence" (i.e. a weakened will due to inherited sin) which blurs the line between moral capacity and inherited condition, thereby undermining God's just character.

Points 6-7: There is major divergence on these two points:
Catholicism teaches original sin as inherited guilt and a state of spiritual death from birth. This is where the Augustinian (i.e. Greek philosophy: Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, et al) influence takes over. Catholicism views infants as in "need of the new birth in Baptism", which contradicts the biblical teaching that sin is not inherited but chosen (Ezekiel 18).

Points 8-9: Catastrophic divergence:
Catholicism affirms Christ's death and resurrection, but it adds sacramentalism, which is the idea that grace is dispensed through the Church’s rituals (especially infant baptism, confession, and Eucharist). This turns salvation into a mediated, institutional process rather than a direct, relational response to God.

Point 10: Totally divergent trajectory!:
Catholicism emphasizes merit, penance, indulgences, purgatory, and ultimately makes salvation something that must be maintained through Church-prescribed means. While they use biblical language (grace, faith, works), the system undermines the simplicity of biblical trust in Christ to the point that it bares little real resemblance in either belief or practice.


Let's put some numbers to it. I started to do this with the identical ten points but it gets complicated because there are various flavors of Catholicism (Augustinian, Jesuit, etc) and so I just sort of winged it here a bit and basically ignored issues like Augustinian predestination. Had I not done so, the score would be much lower.

On a scale from 1 to 10 (These are subjective, of course, and I've intentionally been generous.)....

1. God exists: Fully affirmed without caveat.
Score: 10
2. God is the Creator of all: Unreservedly affirmed in Catholic dogma.
Score: 10
3. Man is made in God’s image: Affirmed, but Catholic anthropology is marred by original-sin guilt from conception.
Score: 7
4. Man has a conscience and is morally accountable: Catholicism teaches both personal sin and concupiscence. A weakened will clouds full moral accountability until sacramental restoration.
Score: 5
5. Jesus is the sinless Son of God who died and rose again. Dogmatically identical.
Score: 10
6. Man is spiritually alive until he sins: Flatly denied. Catholicism holds all are born spiritually dead.
Score: 0
7. When one sins, they die spiritually and need salvation: They affirm need for salvation, but only on top of inherited need. The trigger (personal sin) is buried under original-sin presupposition.
Score: 2
8. Salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone: While Christ is central, grace is only conveyed through Church and sacraments, so it’s never “Christ alone” in practice.
Score: 3
9. God calls all people to repent and believe: The biblical call exists, but is administered through infant baptism, confirmation, penance, etc., making the call mediated rather than direct.
Score: 3
10. Those who trust in Christ are forgiven and have eternal life: Forgiveness and eternal life are potential but require ongoing sacramental cooperation; assurance is explicitly denied.
Score: 2

That's 52 out of 100.

That's a failing score in any school I ever attended!
 

Nick M

Reconciled by the Cross
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Where is Idolater? Or Traditio? I have a slightly different opinion because of Romans 5. Not the part about infant baptism which is ridiculous.

Points 6-7: There is major divergence on these two points:
Catholicism teaches original sin as inherited guilt and a state of spiritual death from birth. This is where the Augustinian (i.e. Greek philosophy: Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, et al) influence takes over. Catholicism views infants as in "need of the new birth in Baptism", which contradicts the biblical teaching that sin is not inherited but chosen (Ezekiel 18).

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

I always took this exactly as he stated it. The law reveals our sin. They just didn't know. So he had to let them know they did in fact sin. And regardless he says this.

18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

And sprinkling a baby with water or anybody else (dunk tank for "Baptists") does not save, nor is it an outward sign. It is a sign that you do not believe you are already washed.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Where is Idolater? Or Traditio? I have a slightly different opinion because of Romans 5. Not the part about infant baptism which is ridiculous.



12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.


I always took this exactly as he stated it. The law reveals our sin. They just didn't know. So he had to let them know they did in fact sin. And regardless he says this.
Who didn't know?

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

And sprinkling a baby with water or anybody else (dunk tank for "Baptists") does not save, nor is it an outward sign. It is a sign that you do not believe you are already washed.
Infant baptism is far worse than a dispensational error, it is blasphemy because it directly implies that God is unjust.

Ezekiel 18:2 “What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying:

‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
And the children’s teeth are set on edge’?

3 “As I live,” says the Lord God, “you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel.

4 “Behold, all souls are Mine;
The soul of the father
As well as the soul of the son is Mine;
The soul who sins shall die.

Deuteronomy 1:39 Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.

 

Derf

Well-known member
Reminder for me, too, to come back and look here, but it will likely be over a week.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Anyone before the introduction of the law. They know they did evil as God showed them. But they didn't know what sin is.
I don't think that's right, Nick. Where you'd get such an idea?

Genesis 4:6 So the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”
 

Nick M

Reconciled by the Cross
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This is proof of the falsity of the claims of the church of Rome. I call it that because it is, and they claim "bishop of Rome". Like Jehova's witness, Islam, LDS, all of their claims are outside the Bible. We know Peter's church fell. Scripture states it. Peter's church is Israel. So to pass succession via a fallen church is outside the faith. Paul said "let them be accursed". Pretty harsh.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Insincere people ask (not from pity) about those who never hear the gospel. They are trying to make the Lord look cruel to the uniformed.
And this supports your thesis, how?

Can we get away from the single sentence posts and make actual arguments that makes sense. I'm literally losing track of what we're even talking about.
 
Last edited:
Top