...Universal cataclism?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 43652517 Stop running, Universal as in their way of saying "the religion for everyone".
I think I understand now what you were saying. You're saying that this new merging between catholics that aren't catholics anymore and protestants that aren't protestants anymore will be universal (or more universal than previous catholicism).
Well that's the objective of the changes. Makes sense as an interpretation too. Well noticed indeed!
Not that I agree those changes to accomodate the two faiths are correct, the position of any bible believing christian should be "what the bible says only" (sola scriptura).
I was refering to something like this:
The term Catholic (usually written with uppercase C in
English) was first used to describe the Christian Church in
the early 2nd century to emphasize its universal scope.
Quoting: [link to en.wikipedia.org] Universal can have many meanings, and it depends on what exactly is the intended meaning. I can list some and my opinion on them:
Universal as embracing all other religions? No, i disagree because it's antibiblical.
Universal as it should be preached all around the world, yes. It's biblical. Jesus Christ ordered his church to preach the gospel all around the world and baptize those who believe.
Universal as common, meaning most people will believe? I doubt, because Jesus Christ said few people enter the narrow way, even though it's God's will for all people to be saved.
Even the church in the first or second century weren't immune to false doctrines. In Revelations, Jesus Christ writes letters to 7 churches in Asia showing that some of them departed from true doctrine/teaching, so we're not to take the writings of early centuries for face value, as if everything they wrote was correct just because they were in the early centuries of the church.
The bible is always the last authority on every subject. Well, this is the protestant viewpoint, or at least it used to be...
