Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why I'm Catholic (Sola Scriptura leads atheist to Catholic Church)
Et Tu ^ | October 23, 2007 | Jennifer F.

Posted on 10/25/2007 10:43:19 AM PDT by NYer

When I was 26, I had never once believed in God. Raised entirely without religion, I was a contented atheist and thought it was simply obvious that God did not exist. I thought that religion and reason were incompatible, and was baffled by why anyone would believe in God (I actually suspected that few people really did). After a few years in the Bible Belt, I became vocally anti-Christian. Imagine my surprise to find myself today, just three years later, a practicing Catholic who loves her faith (I entered the Church at Easter 2007). This is the chronicle of my journey.


I am asked with increasing frequency why I converted to Catholicism as opposed to one of the other Christian denominations. Though this blog is sort of one long conversion story, I've never put together a post summarizing that part of my journey because that subject matter can be a hot (and divisive) topic.

Also, these types of posts are often interpreted to have an implication that people who have had different experiences and have come to different conclusions about religion and God are wrong and therefore not going to be saved. I want to make it really clear that that is not what I believe (nor what the Church believes -- in fact, one of the many things that resonated as true about Catholic teaching is the belief that non-Catholics and non-Christians could also go to heaven).

Anyway, I've decided to go ahead and write about that part of the conversion process, but I want to add a big disclaimer that I'm sharing this in the spirit of telling my story. I am far too concerned about what I see happening in the world today to have any interest in causing division among Christians. We're in this together.

As always, please take this for what it is: the ramblings of some fool with an internet connection. :) Take it (and everything else I write) with a grain of salt.


-------------------

My search for God really began in earnest when I started reading up on Christianity. For a couple years I'd been making half-hearted attempts to open my mind to the possibility of God's existence but it never really went anywhere. And then I stumbled across some reasonable Christian writers who laid out a logical case for Jesus having actually existed, the events as described in the New Testament having actually happened, and for Jesus being who he said he was (former atheist Lee Strobel's Case for Christ has a nice, quick summary). Not that these authors "proved" their case irrefutably or that no arguments could be made against them, but they had a much more compelling, evidence-based case than I'd thought they had. I was intrigued.

I decided to see what it meant to be a Christian. Some bad childhood experiences had left me with a bad taste in my mouth about the religion, but I decided to give it my best effort to start fresh, exploring this belief system with an open mind. I bought a copy of the Bible.

Before I even opened the cover, we had a problem.

I wanted to know if the people who did the English translation of this version were said to have been inspired by God as the writers of the original texts were. When I found out the answer was no, I was concerned. Translators have a lot of leeway and can really impact a text. If this book could potentially be the key to people knowing or not knowing God, I was uneasy about reading a 21st century English version of texts that were written in far different cultures thousands of years ago, translated by average people. Could God not have inspired all translators? Though I was concerned, I decided to set the issue aside for the time being and move on.

Somewhere around page two, we had another problem.

I found the creation story fit surprisingly well with what we know of the origin of the universe through science, albeit in symbolic form. I could definitely believe that this was true. I could not, however, believe that it was a journalistic style account of events, like something you'd read in the newspaper. So I immediately needed to know: is it required of Christians to believe that Genesis is to be taken literally? I asked people and looked around online, and quickly found that there was not unanimous agreement on this. I found people who laid out a pretty good case that, yes, it is required of Christians to believe that Genesis is a literal, blow-by-blow description of events that happened about 6,000 years ago; yet others made a good case that Christians should believe that it is truth conveyed through symbolism. I really couldn't tell who I should believe.

I decided to move on and get to what I really wanted to know about: the Christian moral code. One of the things that had originally piqued my interest in religion in the first place was the fact that humans throughout history have all had this same sense that objective truth exists, what is "right" and "wrong" is not subjective. Also, I had begun to feel confused and lost when I looked at the world around me. This was around the time of the Terri Schiavo controversy, and when I tried to weigh issues like that, as well as the other big ethical dilemmas like human cloning, research on embryos, etc. I just felt sad and adrift. I really didn't know what was right or wrong, yet I had this vague sense that a true "right" answer must be out there somewhere. If there was a God, surely he had opinions about these things. And surely he could guide me to find them.

So I picked the Bible back up and continued reading.

One example of the type of answers I was searching for was what Christianity had to say about abortion. At the time I considered myself staunchly "pro-choice", yet something had started to nag at me about that position. I felt uneasy about the whole thing, and wanted to know if Christianity said that God is OK with abortion or not. I read through the New Testament (eventually reading it cover to cover), and couldn't find much. I kept instinctively flipping to the last page for some sort of answer key. How was I supposed to find the part where God tells us what he thinks about terminating pregnancies? Someone recommended that I get a concordance. I was happy to do that, but it felt strange: in order to know how to live as a Christian you need a Bible and a concordance? And were the writers of the concordance inspired? What if they missed something big or made a mistake?

I wasn't coming up with much so I Googled around to see what Christians had to say about it. And I found as many different opinions as I found people, everyone offering Bible verses to back up their claims. Each person stated their interpretation confidently as a fact -- yet they contradicted one another. When I looked up the verses they cited in my own Bible, sometimes I felt they were right-on, other times I felt they were taken out of context, and other times I didn't even know what the context was (e.g. some Old Testament verses where I just had no idea what was going on).

What frequently happened when I was looking for Biblical answers to my ethical dilemmas was that I'd read two contradictory opinions from two different Christians. I'd decide that Christian #1 made the best case based on Scripture, so I had my answer. But then Christian #2 would come back with a new verse that I'd never seen before that shed new light on it, and then I'd think his case must be the right one. And then Christian #1 would come up with yet another verse and I'd think he had the right answer. And then...well, you get the idea. It seemed that in order to form my own opinion about any of these issues I'd have to have an encyclopedic knowledge of the Bible to make sure I didn't miss anything.

So I started reading. I decided to skip ahead to the New Testament since that's where Jesus comes in. And, as with the Old Testament, we quickly had a problem. Here is a sort of sample discussion I'd have with whatever Christian I could find to pester with questions:

ME: Ack! I just read this part in the New Testament where Jesus tells some rich dude he has to give away all his stuff! If I decide this Christianity thing is true am I going to have to give away all my stuff?! [Worried glace at brand new Dell Inspiron laptop.]

FRIEND: Hah! No, don't worry, Jesus was just talking to that one guy.

ME: Where does it say that? Does he later clarify that that instruction was only for that one guy?

FRIEND: No, but that's clearly how he meant it.

ME: That's not clear to me. Anyway, there's this part where he tells this woman Martha that her sister Mary did the right thing by putting Jesus before trivial stuff. Was that only a lesson for her?

CHRISTIAN: No, that's a lesson for all of us.

ME: [Flipping to last page to look for answer key.] Where is that clarified?

This usually ended with my Christian acquaintances telling me to let the Holy Spirit guide me (and probably making a mental note to find less annoying friends). Even though I wasn't sure I believed in God, I had been praying through this whole process. So I prayed for guidance. I asked God to lead me to the right conclusion about all these questions, to speak to me through Scripture about everything from abortion and experimentation on human embryos to whether or not I needed to give away all my stuff.

After a while of praying, reading the Bible, and visiting some churches, I felt like I had some conclusions. I decided that a good Biblical case could be made for "a woman's right to choose" (as I thought of it then), that I didn't need to give away all my stuff, that it was probably OK to experiment on embryos if it was for curing diseases, etc. I'd felt led to these conclusions, presumably by God, and had found some scriptures that would seem to support them.

But something didn't feel right.

As I continued thinking and praying about whether or not I'd come to the right conclusions about what God wants for us, I realized what the problem was, the reason I couldn't relax: I couldn't trust myself. You have to understand, I am a seriously sinful, selfish person. I realized that my self-serving nature severely clouded my ability to be confident in my interpretation Scripture. I had some pretty passionate opinions about all of these issues, and it was so hard to tell what was leading me to my conclusions. Was my decision that the Bible would be OK with me continuing in my comfy American lifestyle led by the "Holy Spirit" or "Jen's seriously deep desire not to give away all her stuff"? I couldn't tell.

My confusion about all of this made me wonder how people who are severely unintelligent could use the Bible as their guide. I'm probably in the middle of the Bell curve on intelligence, and I was really struggling. For that matter, what about the illiterate? Widespread literacy is a relatively recent phenomenon, yet people who couldn't read couldn't use the Bible as their guide. They'd have to go through another, fallible person, which seemed dangerous.

Taking all of this as a whole, the writing was on the wall, so to speak. Christianity did not seem to be the path to God, if he even did exist. At least not for me. I was just too sinful, too selfish to trust myself to get it right. I felt as adrift as ever in terms of the big ethical questions of our day. Though I thought I might have "experienced" God or the Holy Spirit or something from outside the material world a few times in my exploration, using the Christian holy book to find out how God would want me to live was just not working. I was leaning towards moving on to the next religion, seeking God through some other belief system. I prayed for guidance.


Around this time someone told me that one of the Christian denominations claimed that God did leave us this "answer key" I'd been yearning for. I found out that the Catholic Church claimed to be a sort of divinely-guided Supreme Court, that God guided this Church to be inerrant in its official proclamations about what is right and wrong, how to interpret the Bible, how to know Jesus Christ, and all other questions of God and what he wants us to do.

That got my attention.

Clearly there was a need for this. Surely I was not the only person to ever feel lost in the world, unable to trust myself to objectively interpret the Bible to discern what God wants from us, unable to clearly tell which of my conclusions about right and wrong were guided by the Holy Spirit and which were guided by deeply-rooted selfishness (or perhaps something worse).

Now, obviously I wasn't going to become Catholic. I mean, the Catholic Church is weird and antiquated and sometimes the people in it do seriously bad stuff. But I was interested to at least explore this line of thinking and see what I found.

I could have never, ever imagined what I'd find. Reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church was like nothing I'd ever experienced. This was truth. I knew it. I'd finally found it. It described God, our relationship to him, the Bible, Jesus, moral truths -- the entire human experience -- in a way that resonated on a deep level.

When I started living my life according to Catholic teaching the proof was, as they say, in the pudding. It worked. It worked better than I could have ever guessed it would. And since I've been able to receive what they say is really the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, my soul, my entire life, has changed profoundly. But that is whole separate story (and, really, the main subject of this blog). To summarize my experience, I leave you with a quote from G.K. Chesterton, writing about why he converted to orthodox Catholicism:

I do it because the [Catholic Church] has not merely told this truth or that truth, but has revealed itself as a truth-telling thing. All other philosophies say the things that plainly seem to be true; only this philosophy has again and again said the thing that does not seem to be true, but is true. Alone of all creeds it is convincing where it is not attractive; it turns out to be right, like my father in the garden.

My thoughts exactly.

Again, I share this not to cause division, but for the same reason anyone talks about anything they love -- that mysterious desire we all have to shout from the rooftops about the things that we find to be profound, beautiful, and true.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS: abortion; atheist; bible; conversions; convert; scripture
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-187 next last

1 posted on 10/25/2007 10:43:22 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...

Fascinating


2 posted on 10/25/2007 10:44:02 AM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Oddly enough, this total tangent point jumped out at me:

So I immediately needed to know: is it required of Christians to believe that Genesis is to be taken literally? I asked people and looked around online, and quickly found that there was not unanimous agreement on this. I found people who laid out a pretty good case that, yes, it is required of Christians to believe that Genesis is a literal, blow-by-blow description of events that happened about 6,000 years ago; yet others made a good case that Christians should believe that it is truth conveyed through symbolism. I really couldn't tell who I should believe.

We are required to believe in the literal, historical truth of Genesis. Period.

What we are not required to believe, is that any particular exegete fully comprehends what that literal truth of Genesis actually is: what a "day" is, what kind of day you can have absent the sun, etc. That's all the Church's prerogative.

Genesis 1 was always acknowledged as an extraordinarily difficult text even before the advent of modern science, and St. Augustine famously wrote a book about it in which he sheepishly admitted that he had more questions than answers.

So trust the text absolutely; but be absolutely skeptical of all the exegetes. Until the Church sees fit to pronounce on this definitively, it is all mere speculation....I don't care what camp you are in.

3 posted on 10/25/2007 11:00:55 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Sola Scriptura leads atheist to Catholic Church”

As a Sola Scriptura, I’m not an “atheist”.

It is being a Sola Scriptura that keeps me from becoming a Catholic. Catholic teachings are just that - CATHOLIC teachings and not Biblical teachings.

There you go again ... NYer ... trying to stir the pot with an illogical comment:

“Sola Scriptura leads atheist to Catholic Church”

A “Sola Scriptura” person is not an “atheist”.

This misguided person is obviously not Bible taught otherwise they wouldn’t be an atheist. I can understand hwy such as person who is ignorant would be attracted to the rituals at the Catholic church ... but knowing better than rituals and traditions won’t save you - stick with the Bible and KNOW I am saved and not through works.


4 posted on 10/25/2007 11:04:26 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz; gcruse

Ping.


5 posted on 10/25/2007 11:04:31 AM PDT by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Kudos to the author on a brilliant piece...so many issues resonated with my own reversion....among them the inability to trust ones judgment!


6 posted on 10/25/2007 11:05:52 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

The author meant that she used to be an atheist, but then after she investigated Christianity, her problems with Sola Scriptura led her to become Catholic.

She is not saying that Sola Scriptura folks are atheists—which like you say is illogical.


7 posted on 10/25/2007 11:09:32 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nmh
I can understand hwy such as person who is ignorant would be attracted to the rituals at the Catholic church ... but knowing better than rituals and traditions won’t save you - stick with the Bible and KNOW I am saved and not through works.

Funny, twenty-five years of being "saved" didn't give me victory over sin, but "rituals and traditions" did.

8 posted on 10/25/2007 11:11:19 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Hello,
Is the Sola Scriptura Comment in the original, because that’s not the gist I got. I got the gist of “search for authorative centralized theological postion leads atheist to Catholic Church”


9 posted on 10/25/2007 11:12:32 AM PDT by Cheverus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Hello,
With all due respect, I think maybe you read the wrong article. I suggest this based on the following points:

* Although I read it quickly, I saw no reference to “rituals” attracting her, yet your comment indicated that is what she suggested.

* The article said she began as an Atheist and her search for God brought her to Scripture - your comment indicates that she was an atheist while searching for Truth, clearly if she was seeking God she was went from Atheist, to Agnositic and was likely some sort of believer while reading scripture.

Now if you re-read the article you will have the opportunity to note that it could easily be titled, “Scripture lead atheist to Christianity” the crux of her Theological position and final arrival into the Catholic Church boils down to whether or not the Magisterium of the Catholic Church has the ability to teach authoratatively as she was somewhat concerned with the various translations and various constructions of the scriptures.

That said it would seem that she and you differ as to whether a specific body can interpret scripture or whether it is left to the individual.

Either way, saying “Catholic bad, me good” does no one any good. A suggestion would be to politely disagree with the young lady as I am sure she would politely disagree with you (as you will note she never said “Sola Scripture folks bad, me good”).

Thank you for your comment and indulgence.


10 posted on 10/25/2007 11:24:23 AM PDT by Cheverus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer
As always, please take this for what it is: the ramblings of some fool with an internet connection. :)

Duly noted.

11 posted on 10/25/2007 11:31:43 AM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Claud
so many issues resonated with my own reversion....among them the inability to trust ones judgment!

The Supreme Court analogy was my exact deduction, too.

12 posted on 10/25/2007 11:32:06 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Jennifer did not trust the Bible, could not trust other Christians, so chose to trust the Church.

Jennifer you need only trust in God and believe in Jesus Christ. John 3:16

13 posted on 10/25/2007 11:38:08 AM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
The Supreme Court analogy was my exact deduction, too.

Me too! LOL

You mean I'm not as independently brilliant as I thought? Drat this religion of humility!!!! ;)

14 posted on 10/25/2007 11:46:53 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Great read. If you follow the truth wherever it leads, you’ll eventually end up in the Church.


15 posted on 10/25/2007 12:00:31 PM PDT by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The essay concludes with a quotation from Orthodoxy by GK Chesterton, a book he wrote in 1908—when he was an Anglican. But in context, he is speaking of authoritative Christian Orthodoxy, and by and large the point stands for the Catholic Church too.


16 posted on 10/25/2007 12:03:09 PM PDT by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
Jennifer you need only trust in God and believe in Jesus Christ.

And everything he taught, right?

"if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." --Jesus,

17 posted on 10/25/2007 12:07:35 PM PDT by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nmh
As a Sola Scriptura, I’m not an “atheist”.

No one suggested this.

Catholic teachings are just that - CATHOLIC teachings and not Biblical teachings.

On the contrary; they are totally biblical.

This misguided person is obviously not Bible taught

And you obviously did not read the post!

18 posted on 10/25/2007 12:12:36 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cheverus
Is the Sola Scriptura Comment in the original, because that’s not the gist I got. I got the gist of “search for authorative centralized theological postion leads atheist to Catholic Church”

She began her search using the Bible and tried to interpret it herself. She met others who told her to ask the Holy Spirit for guidance in interpreting the Scripture. Hence the comment on the title. This is a remarkable testimony to why Sola Scriptura doesn't work. Too many different views and opinions. The word truth appears only in the singular, in Scripture. There can be only one truth - not many.

19 posted on 10/25/2007 12:18:52 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Claud
You mean I'm not as independently brilliant as I thought?

But of course you are!

Just not "uniquely" ;o>

20 posted on 10/25/2007 12:21:14 PM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Believe what you wish!

You’re transparent in your never ending divisiveness towards non Catholics.

21 posted on 10/25/2007 1:00:27 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nmh

You really should have read the article. She said she was an atheist in search.


22 posted on 10/25/2007 2:55:36 PM PDT by Jaded ("I have a mustard- seed; and I am not afraid to use it."- Joseph Ratzinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Bookmarking


23 posted on 10/25/2007 3:04:22 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
If you follow the truth wherever it leads, you’ll eventually end up in the Church.

I'd go further and say you'll begin in the Church. When the human soul is regenerated through the power of the Holy Spirit through Faith in the Son of God, he is in the Body of Christ, His Church.

24 posted on 10/25/2007 3:29:17 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Claud
This girl "gets it". Good post in #3 Claud.

...Christian acquaintances telling me to let the Holy Spirit guide me...

Ironically, this is exactly what Catholics do every day when we put our trust in the Church. We trust that the Holy Spirit guides Her to all truth.

I don't know why that notion is so repulsive to so many non-Catholic Christians. (well actually I do have a pretty good idea why it is, but no sense in getting personal, and that's not a "dig" against anyone's intelligence; it's implying something far more "dark"). What everyone should remember though is exactly what this girl apparently realized, instinctually: Not everyone is appointed Pope.

Not everyone is given all the gifts the Holy Spirit has to offer. This is what, to me, many non Catholics seem to not realize. To suggest that there aren't "SOME apostles, SOME prophets, SOME teachers, etc", but rather, "ALL are apostles, ALL are prophets, ALL are (their own self) teachers" is clearly contrary to Scripture.

But again, that point seems to be lost on so many.

25 posted on 10/25/2007 3:45:18 PM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
Jennifer you need only trust in God and believe in Jesus Christ. John 3:16

That's not going to work. It's just too simple. We need a never ending complicated system. ;-0

26 posted on 10/25/2007 3:50:47 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NYer; nmh
NMH: Catholic teachings are just that - CATHOLIC teachings and not Biblical teachings.

NYER: On the contrary; they are totally biblical.

It seems to me that we just had a discussion a week or so ago and you very confidently stated that your church authority was more important than Scripture. You may claim a lot of things on your practice of making tradition equal to Scripture, but those things are not necessarily Scriptural.

27 posted on 10/25/2007 3:56:36 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nmh

**As a Sola Scriptura, I’m not an “atheist”.**

You are missing the point.
1. The person was an atheist.
2. He learned about sola scriptura and found it lacking.
3. He was then led to the Catholic Church where there is belief both in Holy Scripture and in Holy Tradition.

Hence the remarks:
**When I started living my life according to Catholic teaching the proof was, as they say, in the pudding. It worked. It worked better than I could have ever guessed it would. And since I’ve been able to receive what they say is really the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, my soul, my entire life, has changed profoundly. But that is whole separate story (and, really, the main subject of this blog). To summarize my experience, I leave you with a quote from G.K. Chesterton, writing about why he converted to orthodox Catholicism:

I do it because the [Catholic Church] has not merely told this truth or that truth, but has revealed itself as a truth-telling thing. All other philosophies say the things that plainly seem to be true; only this philosophy has again and again said the thing that does not seem to be true, but is true. Alone of all creeds it is convincing where it is not attractive; it turns out to be right, like my father in the garden.**

I’m sure you understand what he was saying now.


28 posted on 10/25/2007 5:09:10 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Oops, that should have been “She” in those sentences.


29 posted on 10/25/2007 5:18:45 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Why I'm Catholic (Sola Scriptura leads atheist to Catholic Church)
From Calvinist to Catholic (another powerful conversion story) Rodney Beason
Good-bye To All That (Another Episcopalian gets ready to swim the Tiber)
Bp. Steenson's Letter to his clergy on his conversion to the Catholic Church>

Bishop Steenson’s Statement to the House [of Bishops: Episcopal (TEC) to Catholic]
Bp. Steenson's Letter to his clergy on his conversion to the Catholic Church
Bishop Steenson Will Become a Roman Catholic
Married man considers turn as Catholic priest
Pavarotti returns to the Catholic faith before dying

Searching For Authority (A Methodist minister finds himself surprised by Truth!)
Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part VI: The Biblical Reality (Al Kresta)
Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part V: The Catholics and the Pope(Al Kresta)
The Hail Mary of a Protestant (A true story)
Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part IV: Crucifix and Altar(Al Kresta)

Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part III: Tradition and Church (Al Kresta)
Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part II: Doubts (Al Kresta)
Why I Returned to the Catholic Church. Part I: Darkness(Al Kresta)
Conversion Story - Matt Enloe (former Baptist) [prepare to be amazed!]
THE ORTHODOX REVIVAL IN RUSSIA

Conversion Story - David Finkelstein (former Jew)
Conversion Story - John Weidner (former Evangelical)
12 Reasons I Joined the Catholic Church
Conversion Story - Tom Hunt
The Tide Is Turning Toward Catholicism: The Converts

John Calvin Made Me Catholic
Journey Home - May 21 - Neil Babcox (former Presbyterian) - A minister encounters Mary
Going Catholic - Six journeys to Rome
My (Imminent) Reception into the Roman Catholic Church
A Convert's Pilgrimage [Christopher Cuddy]

From Pastor to Parishioner: My Love for Christ Led Me Home (to the Catholic Church) [Drake McCalister]
Lutheran professor of philosophy prepares to enter Catholic Church
Patty Bonds (former Baptist and sister of Dr. James White) to appear on The Journey Home - May 7
Pastor and Flock Become Catholics
Why Converts Choose Catholicism

From Calvinist to Catholic
The journey back - Dr. Beckwith explains his reasons for returning to the Catholic Church
Famous Homosexual Italian Author Returned to the Church Before Dying of AIDS
Dr. Francis Beckwith Returns To Full Communion With The Church
Catholic Converts - Stephen K. Ray (former Evangelical)

Catholic Converts - Malcolm Muggeridge
Catholic Converts - Richard John Neuhaus
Catholic Converts - Avery Cardinal Dulles
Catholic Converts - Israel (Eugenio) Zolli - Chief Rabbi of Rome
Catholic Converts - Robert H. Bork , American Jurist (Catholic Caucus)
Catholic Converts - Marcus Grodi
The Scott Hahn Conversion Story

FORMER PENTECOSTAL RELATES MIRACLE THAT OCCURRED WITH THE PRECIOUS BLOOD
Conversion Story - Rusty Tisdale (former Pentecostal)

30 posted on 10/25/2007 5:21:35 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheverus; NYer
Is the Sola Scriptura Comment in the original

No, this was just a cheap shot at Calvinists taken by the poster.

Sola Scriptura is mentioned only by a Baptist poster named Terri well down the page at the link.

31 posted on 10/25/2007 7:12:26 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Simul iustus et peccator; Disgusted in Texas; B Knotts; ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton; corbos; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

32 posted on 10/25/2007 7:27:35 PM PDT by narses (...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Paul, by word or letter, i’ve seen; sola scriptura, not yet. What’s the verse? I’m definitely not bible taught.


33 posted on 10/25/2007 8:13:27 PM PDT by AliVeritas (Pray, Pray, Pray)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Actually I would like people to explain to me why Catholic Teachings are not Biblical? What did the first Christians do before there even was a Bible? The Catholic Church actually reveres Scripture as they do the Body of Christ? What I would like to know from Protestants that if you believe in the Bible why aren’t you Catholic? The Bible is a Catholic Book. It is a common fact that the Bible was put together in 397 AD at the Council Of Carthage by the Catholic Church and ratified by Pope Boniface. Why would the Catholic Church pull together biblical books that would contradict everything they teach? After that there was no argument as to what books where in the Bible among Christians until Luther’s reformation in the 1500. That was when The idea of Scripture alone began. And he only did that because of the idea of Purgatory.


34 posted on 10/25/2007 8:49:40 PM PDT by Grudgebringer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: nmh
You’re transparent in your never ending divisiveness towards non Catholics.

Huh? It was pretty clear from eve a skim of the article that the woman was an atheist and became Catholic. How you deduced an accusation that sola scriptura Christians are atheists is beyond me.
35 posted on 10/25/2007 8:56:21 PM PDT by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PAR35
No, this was just a cheap shot at Calvinists taken by the poster.

Yes cheap shot, but it wasn't just directed at Calvinists.

36 posted on 10/25/2007 9:47:32 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines; wmfights
Jennifer did not trust the Bible, could not trust other Christians, so chose to trust the Church.

Trusting the Church IS trusting other Christians. DUH!

Jennifer you need only trust in God and believe in Jesus Christ.

Of course, you don't have to actually believe that anything Jesus said is the truth.

When he said, "This is my body," that isn't the truth. He only meant, "This is a reminder of my body."

When he said to his apostles, "Who hears you, hears me," that isn't the truth either, because what he really meant was, "read the book and pay attention to what you like, and that's good enough".

When he said, "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church," he was obviously just telling Peter how worthless he was, and so that verse has nothing to do with you, either, because "his church" is really "your church," wherever and whatever you want it to be.

When he said, "Whosoever sins you forgive, they are forgiven them; whosoever sins you hold bound, they are held bound," that's really code for, "you don't have to confess to any men, just tell God about it and it'll be cool."

And when he said, "You must be born from above by water and the Holy Spirit," he really meant, "you must answer an altar call and pray the 'sinner's prayer' and you'll be infallibly saved; any discussion of water here is merely a gynecology lesson."

See, you can "believe in Jesus" without believing anything Jesus said.

</sarcasm>

37 posted on 10/25/2007 10:30:25 PM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Grudgebringer
What I would like to know from Protestants that if you believe in the Bible why aren’t you Catholic?

Are you quite sure you want to go there? As you fired the first salvo, any whimpering about "anti-Catholisim about my answer will garner no sympathy from me.

38 posted on 10/25/2007 10:35:08 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nmh
...divisiveness towards non Catholics

What exactly does that mean?

39 posted on 10/26/2007 4:19:42 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
That's not going to work. It's just too simple.

Simple is "better?"

40 posted on 10/26/2007 4:41:30 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PAR35
No, this was just a cheap shot at Calvinists taken by the poster.

Why do you call this a "cheap shot?"

41 posted on 10/26/2007 4:46:05 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
Yes cheap shot, but it wasn't just directed at Calvinists.

I do not understand how a total pagan who converts to Christianity, and concludes the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is untenable, constitutes a "cheap shot."

42 posted on 10/26/2007 4:54:59 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
I do not understand how a total pagan who converts to Christianity, and concludes the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is untenable, constitutes a "cheap shot."

Atheists aren't pagans & visa versa. We should all rejoice about an atheist converting to Christianity, not using her conversion as an opportunity to take a shot at some of the beliefs of other Christians, a common result in most threads of the conversion articles posted.

Sola Scriptura didn't lead the woman anywhere. "Putting words" into the mouth of the convert (the addition to the title) is an ugly passive aggressive tactic.

If Sola Scriptura is untenable for her, you or anyone else & the discipline of hierarchal authority is what y'all need, it works for you, that's fine. Trying to make it into a requirement for all is crossing a line that shouldn't be crossed.

43 posted on 10/26/2007 6:23:42 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Grudgebringer
The Bible is a Catholic Book. It is a common fact that the Bible was put together in 397 AD at the Council Of Carthage by the Catholic Church and ratified by Pope Boniface.

I have a friend who has put together a complete anthology of the Beatles music on his iPod, that does not mean that it is his music, just that he collected it.

After that there was no argument as to what books where in the Bible among Christians until Luther’s reformation in the 1500.

LOL. Always there have been variations, always will be.

44 posted on 10/26/2007 6:37:21 AM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
Atheists aren't pagans ...

If atheists aren't pagans, then the word has no meaning.

Sola Scriptura didn't lead the woman anywhere. "Putting words" into the mouth of the convert (the addition to the title) is an ugly passive aggressive tactic.

No one claimed it did. That is an ugly "straw man."

There is nothing wrong with addind the colloquial term to the conclusions of a new believer when those conclusions are identical. Would you get upset if "communion" was added to her tale of receiving the body and blood?

Trying to make it into a requirement for all is crossing a line that shouldn't be crossed.

According to whom, and why not?

45 posted on 10/26/2007 6:38:42 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
Always there have been variations, always will be.

I'm not aware of any substantive controversy. Could you cite one?

46 posted on 10/26/2007 6:43:53 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I have a challenge to you & all other Christians around here, whoever reads this post. Rather than talking about converts, might be worthy use of some of our energy to work on converting someone.

I wandered over to YouTube yesterday & happened across a couple of potential candidates. The video was a Copt explaining the Trinity on al Jazerra (sp). On the surface, they look like they’d be resistant, but, something in the video drew them in. I think that taking the discussion to PM there would work better than getting into the public discussion.

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=rBCEnHOn1gI&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DrBCEnHOn1gI


47 posted on 10/26/2007 6:50:02 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Campion
Trusting the Church IS trusting other Christians. DUH!

Perhaps I should have said she did not trust individual Christians.

Of course, you don't have to actually believe that anything Jesus said is the truth.

Sadly you list of Jesus' quotes from the Bible would not have done Jennifer any good. Unlike you, she does not trust the Bible nor would she trust an individual Christians such as yourself. The only way that Jennifer will accept anything you have to say about Jesus is if you hold the "answer key" as an official representative of that divinely-guided Supreme Court, the Church. Unless you have the authority to speak for the Church, all of your wisdom is lost on Jennifer.

Though I do think that she would appreciate your sarcasm.

48 posted on 10/26/2007 7:07:18 AM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

You are, of course, correct. For awhile, the Pro-Life movement was bringing together different Christians, however, Islam has the potential to unite us like nothing else.


49 posted on 10/26/2007 7:10:22 AM PDT by old and tired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
Why do you call this a "cheap shot?"

1.Because Sola Scriptura is one of the 5 solas of the reformation.
2.The comment was added by the poster, and doesn't appear in the original article or its headline.
3.It appears that the original writer had not been exposed to any of the reformed bodies - she turned to Rome because they had a written catechism, but she makes no mention of having been exposed to the confessions and catechisms of the reformed bodies, meaning it is unlikely anything in the theology of Luther or Calvin lead her to Rome.

I will concede that my use of 'Calvinists' in my reply was too narrow; I should have used 'Reformed' to have included the Lutherans as well.

50 posted on 10/26/2007 7:16:48 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-187 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson