Converting to Judaism in ancient times

[PRC]

No they weren't. The whole "state church" thing was pretty antithetical to christ's teachings.

They worship Christ, that's all it takes.  So do the Mormon and plenty of other nutbars.  Worship Christ - you're a Christian.

And for Raz though the muslims count Christ as an early Prophet - they don't worship him - they worship God and Mohammad is his Prophet.

[Razgovory]

They don't "worship" Mohamed.

[Razgovory]

How can catholics not be christian? They were like the first christians lol

No they weren't. The whole "state church" thing was pretty antithetical to christ's teachings.

Catholicism is not a state church.

[PRC]

They don't "worship" Mohamed.

Never said they did.

[Viking]

To be Christian is to believe that Christ died for your sins and the only way to redemption is through faith. As far as I'm concerned that is the non-exclusive definition of Christianity.

[Razgovory]

To be Christian is to believe that Christ died for your sins and the only way to redemption is through faith. As far as I'm concerned that is the non-exclusive definition of Christianity.

That's pretty exclusive since it leaves out Catholics. 

[Viking]

To be Christian is to believe that Christ died for your sins and the only way to redemption is through faith. As far as I'm concerned that is the non-exclusive definition of Christianity.

That's pretty exclusive since it leaves out Catholics.

Then Catholics should RTFM then stop praying to idols and following the anti-christ.

[Eddie Teach]

Ask a Protestant/Catholic seriously if the other is going to heaven and they'll say "Maybe." Ask them if a Mormon is going to heaven and they'll say no.

[Sheilbh]

How can catholics not be christian? They were like the first christians lol

No they weren't. The whole "state church" thing was pretty antithetical to christ's teachings.

Catholicism's not a statist Church and never has been.  It's always been influenced by different states - for example the fondness French and German rulers had for invading and threatening Rome, the move to Avignon, Mary Tudor's protection of Reginald Pole.

From Canossa to the modern day the Catholic Church has actually been arguing that Church and State are separate, because the Church wanted independence from the state.  Though it's only since the 19th century, ironically when Catholicism lost its state power in Italy, that the Church effectively became independent of the state and ultramontanism won out over other statist doctrines like Gallicanism.

The conflation of Church and State was an Orthodox and a Protestant thing far more than it was a Catholic one.

And as anyone would say Christ's teachings aren't sufficient in and of themselves.  What you need is the doctrine, the law, the authority and the tradition to really judge what is or what should be dogma.  I think every real Christian Church of any significance would say that adherence to the Council of Nicea is the baseline for Christianity.  That the Arians and Mormons don't believe in what Nicea agreed I don't think they can truly be considered Christian.  They're a sect like the Gnostics, no more.

[The Brain]

Sorry, no amount of spin can make Catholics Christian. They have strayed so far from the path it's not even funny.

[Maximus]

Catholicism's not a statist Church and never has been.  It's always been influenced by different states - for example the fondness French and German rulers had for invading and threatening Rome, the move to Avignon, Mary Tudor's protection of Reginald Pole.

From Canossa to the modern day the Catholic Church has actually been arguing that Church and State are separate, because the Church wanted independence from the state.  Though it's only since the 19th century, ironically when Catholicism lost its state power in Italy, that the Church effectively became independent of the state and ultramontanism won out over other statist doctrines like Gallicanism.

The conflation of Church and State was an Orthodox and a Protestant thing far more than it was a Catholic one.

  I think every real Christian Church of any significance would say that adherence to the Council of Nicea is the baseline for Christianity.  That the Arians and Mormons don't believe in what Nicea agreed I don't think they can truly be considered Christian.  They're a sect like the Gnostics, no more.

Let's start with the council of Nicea--convened by the emperor and presided over by himself and tell me that's not a state church.

And as anyone would say Christ's teachings aren't sufficient in and of themselves.  What you need is the doctrine, the law, the authority and the tradition to really judge what is or what should be dogma.

This sounds like complete BS to me. If christ is the son of god then surely it is his words that matter and not those of mere mortals.

[Sheilbh]

Let's start with the council of Nicea--convened by the emperor and presided over by himself and tell me that's not a state church.

I didn't think we were talking about antiquity because it's the least contentious period of Christian history.  Every single Church and sect claims that it's the one living up to this period.

This sounds like complete BS to me. If christ is the son of god then surely it is his words that matter and not those of mere mortals.

How do you decide when there are more than one possible interpretations?  Through tradition, ecclesiastical authority and existing doctrine.

[DontSayBanana]

I didn't think we were talking about antiquity because it's the least contentious period of Christian history.  Every single Church and sect claims that it's the one living up to this period.

Most major protestant churches only trace their history as organized faiths to the 16th or 17th centuries. Presbyterian - John Calvin, around 1537; Baptist - 1609; Lutheran - somewhere between the Diet of Worms and 1628 (solid date for the first American Lutheran church, no solid date for first official Lutheran church, but I'm sure it wasn't organized by Luther himself).

[The Minsky Moment]

That the Arians and Mormons don't believe in what Nicea agreed I don't think they can truly be considered Christian.  They're a sect like the Gnostics, no more.

I'm staying out of the Mormon piece, but this is not a tenable statement with respect to the Arians.  Some of the most important early Church fathers had what we now call Arian beliefs.  It is just as accurate -- probably moreso -- to call Athanasius and his followers "a sect like the Gnostics".  Just because the victors rewrite the histories doesn't mean we have to accept their word for it.

[Maximus]

I didn't think we were talking about antiquity because it's the least contentious period of Christian history.  Every single Church and sect claims that it's the one living up to this period.

We are talking about antiquity. I was responding to the contention that the roman church were the original christians.