How is it that the Catholic Church is evil?

[The Liturgist]

No where does it say God's church is the Catholic church. Based on what Scriptures indicates and based on the Catholics own teachings I would say its not.

Nowhere does what say God’s church is the Catholic church? And what is your definition of Catholic? And what is your definition of God’s church?

The bottom line is if you agree with the Nicene Creed, which does not require agreement with the Roman Catholic Church, except where the RCC agrees with the Nicene Creed. But beyond what is mentioned in the Creed, no other Roman doctrines attach themselves to the Creed or even the word “Catholic” which as I’ve explained does not mean Roman Catholic (indeed Lutherans, Anglicans, Orthodox, Assyrians and many other churches have Catholic in their name).

 

[SabbathBlessings]

No goalposts have been moved - I want to know based on your assertion we don’t need the Church whether or not you disagree with the Nicene Creed concerning it.

What does that have to do with what I posted


John 14:6 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

We do not need a church to tell us what the Bible teaches, we need to verify what our church is teaching with God's holy Word , which is the Authority, not man. The devil is not going to be deceiving us in the bars, its in the churches that is the greatest deception. Sadly 99% of churches teach we do not need to keep the Testimony of God. Exo 31:18 that we can edit God's own Testimony that He personally wrote as if man can replace what God wrote personally and replace what God said is in His ark, with man-made teachings. Jesus warns about this, yet many don't believe His plain teachings. Its a sad state of affairs we are in. Similar to the days of Noah.

 

[The Liturgist]

What does that have to do with what I posted


John 14:6 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

We do not need a church to tell us what the Bible teaches, we need to verify what our church is teaching with God's holy Word is, which is the Authority, not man. The devil is not going to be deceiving us in the bars, its in the churches that is the greatest deception. Sadly 99% of churches teach we do not need to keep the Testimony of God. Exo 31:18 that we can edit God's own Testimony that He personally wrote as if man can replace what God wrote personally and replace what God said is in His ark, with man-made teachings. Jesus warns about this, yet many don't believe His plain teachings. Its a sad state of affairs we are in.

So do you agree or disagree with the Nicene Creed? It’s a simple question. It is relevant to what you stated because the explanation as to why you are in error regarding the teaching office of the Church is complex, and I won’t bother making it if you’re not willing to confess the Creed.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

So do you agree or disagree with the Nicene Creed? It’s a simple question. It is relevant to what you stated because the explanation as to why you are in error regarding the teaching office of the Church is complex, and I won’t bother making it if you’re not willing to confess the Creed.

I already stated what I believe, there is one church and the Bible tells us what His church is made up of Rev 14:12. Please stop trying to goad me.

 

[The Liturgist]

I already stated what I believe, there is one church and the Bible tells us what His church is made up of Rev 14:12. Please stop trying to goad me.

I’m not trying to goad you, I just wish to clarify you are Nicene lest I waste a great deal of time explaining the teaching ministry of the Church and why it is needed to communicate the contents and meaning of the Creed. It sounds like you are so we will proceed on that assumption.

But first, I want to make sure you realize that the word “Catholic” does not automatically refer to the RCC.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I’m not trying to goad you, I just wish to clarify you are Nicene lest I waste a great deal of time explaining the teaching ministry of the Church and why it is needed to communicate the contents and meaning of the Creed. It sounds like you are so we will proceed on that assumption.

But first, I want to make sure you realize that the word “Catholic” does not automatically refer to the RCC.

So your view of the Nicene Creed is that the Holy Spirit will not teach us and bring us back to His word, for those willing. Not sure why the Scriptures I posted would prompt such a response in the first place.

 

[The Liturgist]

So your view of the Nicene Creed is that the Holy Spirit will not teach us and bring us back to His word, for those willing. Not sure why the Scriptures I posted would prompt such a response in the first place.

The Holy Spirit will call us to repentance, but it is in the Church where we hear the Scriptures and learn the faith and we are saved in the church that we have been grafted onto, the Body of Christ, according to St. Paul in 1 Corinthians.

The role of the Holy Spirit and the Church are quite different. If someone commits themselves, due to misunderstanding or the preaching of a charismatic pastor, to a dangerous heresy, that heresy can color their reading of Scripture, and Scripture does not contain within itself defenses against all or even most heresies.

For example, Tertullian, who coined the word “Trinitas” which became “Trinity” who obviously knew a fair amount about the doctrine, came to believe that the Holy Spirit was not the Paraclete, for his rigorism (he believed sins committed after baptism would not be forgiven) led him to separate from the Roman church and to join the Montanist sect, which was led by Montanus, a man who claimed to be the Paraclete, and who was accompanied by two or three women who would engage in ecstatic “prophecy” in the manner one associates with certain oracles of ancient Greece.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Sadly, you went to a whole other topic, instead of staying on topic and believing what God said plainly is in His ark.

Regarding Babylon we can still love our brothers and sisters who are in Babylon (false teachings) by showing them what the Scriptures say plainly in hopes and prayers they start believing them and come out like we are told to before its too late Rev 18:4


Yet you provided no Scripture where it says Mary is the ark of the new covenant and sadly ignored what the plain Scripture said which tells us what is in the ark. I guess that's why you opted to bring Ellen in as a distraction, when I was quoting what God said. no one else. God personally wrote and spoke His Testimony, Exo 31:18 placed inside His ark. Exo 40:20 which is in heaven Rev 15:5 Rev 11:19. The whole Bible is about the testimony of God through His prophets and apostles, yet when it comes to God's own personal Testimony He did not leave for man to write, few believe.

So few believe your interpretation that it was unheard of in all of Christendom for over 1800 years. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever, why should we accept your new interpretation which was previously unheard of?

God was not capable of leading His Church for 1800 years? Could it not be that you are mistaken in your interpretation?
The Sabbath question was addressed by the Apostles in the second century testimony from
their teaching in the first century. No one had your interpretation until 1860
You can close your eyes and pretend the Church did not exist or apostacized for 1800 years, but repeating your mantra of plain reading does not make it true except in your own mind
Even reading the book From Sabbath to Sunday or great controversy does not give us answers. They just repeat the mantra we are right and everybody else is wrong

It is not true to the principle of the Sabbath to accept your view. Sabbath tells us that God creates, then He rests. He does not build, allow what He has built to be destroyed and then need human effort rebuild what was lost. Christ built an Apostolic Church by His own word. It has been here since the beginning and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
To believe you, we would have to affirm and deny the Sabbath at the same time. That is double minded, and scripture says a double minded man is unstable in all his ways. An example is the SDA’s refusal to take a stance on abortion.
They do not say that stripping a child from his mother’s womb is absolutely evil. They paint it as a difficult decision and also say that profanation of the marital act is morally good due to stewardship. What are we to conclude? How is this from a plain reading of scripture? Killing a baby is a difficult decision? What scripture do you use for that?

These are not my words. They are form the SDA statement of faith. I don’t see how I can trust someone that says just read scripture and cannot tell me that killing innocent life is evil, we have to accept it. How does this not lead to confusion?
Swing the Bible around all you want and yell plain reading, but when the actions of your leaders do not remain consistent with Scripture nor honor God by the principle of the Sabbath, your argument really falls flat

I believe that you want to serve God, and scripture says what ever you do, do it unto the Lord. You need to rethink your position and see what really honors God

 

[The Liturgist]

So few believe your interpretation that it was unheard of in all of Christendom for over 1800 years. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever, why should we accept your new interpretation which was previously unheard of?

Also the fact is most worship on the Sabbath occurs in Roman Catholic Churches so even if we accept the SDA premise that Saturday worship is essential, the RCC does most of it, and is the only denomination which requires everyone in Holy Orders to pray the Divine Office and celebrate the Mass every Saturday, and also allows the faithful to attend Mass on Saturday evening rather than Sunday if needed.

The actual objection of Adventists collapses in light of the fact that all liturgical churches worship on the Sabbath, particularly Orthodox and Catholics, but ironically not the majority of Baptists and other low church Protestants the SDA tries to affiliate with. So it ought to go after them, but rather the SDA hopes to persuade non-Sabbatarian Restorationists and Protestants to convert to it and does this through extreme anti-Catholic polemics - the SDA is one of only a few denominations, along with Calvinists who subscribe to the Westminster Confession of Faith, that makes anti-Catholicism an essential dogma, and the Adventists have gone further than most.

Meanwhile the Orthodox and Roman Catholics and other traditional churches do not dogmatize opposition to any local church but pray for reunion and indeed the ecumenical movement has born fruit. And also non-Sabbatarian Protestants like the SBC set aside their differences with Roman Catholics to engage in the March for Life and other pro-life agitation that led to Roe v. Wade.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The Holy Spirit will call us to repentance, but it is in the Church where we hear the Scriptures and learn the faith and we are saved in the church that we have been grafted onto, the Body of Christ, according to St. Paul in 1 Corinthians.

The Scripture I posted states otherwise. I’m going to stick with what God said, but we have free will.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

So few believe your interpretation that it was unheard of in all of Christendom for over 1800 years. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever, why should we accept your new interpretation which was previously unheard of?

God was not capable of leading His Church for 1800 years? Could it not be that you are mistaken in your interpretation?
The Sabbath question was addressed by the Apostles in the second century testimony from
their teaching in the first century. No one had your interpretation until 1860
You can close your eyes and pretend the Church did not exist or apostacized for 1800 years, but repeating your mantra of plain reading does not make it true except in your own mind
Even reading the book From Sabbath to Sunday or great controversy does not give us answers. They just repeat the mantra we are right and everybody else is wrong

It is not true to the principle of the Sabbath to accept your view. Sabbath tells us that God creates, then He rests. He does not build, allow what He has built to be destroyed and then need human effort rebuild what was lost. Christ built an Apostolic Church by His own word. It has been here since the beginning and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
To believe you, we would have to affirm and deny the Sabbath at the same time. That is double minded, and scripture says a double minded man is unstable in all his ways. An example is the SDA’s refusal to take a stance on abortion.
They do not say that stripping a child from his mother’s womb is absolutely evil. They paint it as a difficult decision and also say that profanation of the marital act is morally good due to stewardship. What are we to conclude? How is this from a plain reading of scripture? Killing a baby is a difficult decision? What scripture do you use for that?

These are not my words. They are form the SDA statement of faith. I don’t see how I can trust someone that says just read scripture and cannot tell me that killing innocent life is evil, we have to accept it. How does this not lead to confusion?
Swing the Bible around all you want and yell plain reading, but when the actions of your leaders do not remain consistent with Scripture nor honor God by the principle of the Sabbath, your argument really falls flat

I believe that you want to serve God, and scripture says what ever you do, do it unto the Lord. You need to rethink your position and see what really honors God

We were told grievous wolves would come in not sparing flock Acts 20:29-31. I never quoted anyone but what God said is in His ark. Its up to us to beleive or not beleive His written word. Its our free will and in Jesus's time, it will all get sorted out.

Be well.

 

[The Liturgist]

The Scripture I posted states otherwise. I’m going to stick with what God said, but we have free will.

No, it doesn’t. One Scripture verse doesn’t contradict another. You quoted one verse, but I pointed you to an entire book, 1 Corinthians, and you’re not explaining how that verse negates an entire book. I could provide more individual verses, and I will if need be, but really, ironically, the issue is that Scripture can be misinterpreted. There is, contrary to what you say, more than one way to interpret a verse. Also, not all differences in intepretation are the result of disobedience or dishonesty. There are some scriptures where there is no consensus on what they mean, and most denominations simply allow members to form their own opinions. Remember 2 Peter 2:15 - no prophecy is of any private interpretation.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

No, it doesn’t. One Scripture verse doesn’t contradict another. You quoted one verse, but I pointed you to an entire book, 1 Corinthians, and you’re not explaining how that verse negates an entire book. I could provide more individual verses, and I will if need be, but really, ironically, the issue is that Scripture can be misinterpreted. There is, contrary to what you say, more than one way to interpret a verse. Also, not all differences in intepretation are the result of disobedience or dishonesty. There are some scriptures where there is no consensus on what they mean, and most denominations simply allow members to form their own opinions. Remember 2 Peter 2:15 - no prophecy is of any private interpretation.

So the Holy Spirit doesn't teach us the word of God in your point of view and instead we have to rely on a church, despite no church agreeing on doctrine. So the church knows more than the Holy Spirit.

I guess that's why we get these types of teachings with this mindset such as

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

He warns us plainly going away from God’s word Isa 8:20 so for me I very much believe the Holy Spirit is active changing lives if we hear His voice Heb 3:7-19 leading people back to what God said ,so I am going to believe Him at His word John 14:6 , just as He writes so plainly, but we have free will.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

We were told grievous wolves would come in not sparing flock Acts 20:29-31. I never quoted anyone but what God said is in His ark. Its up to us to beleive or not beleive His written word. Its our free will and in Jesus's time, it will all get sorted out.

Be well.

You have not said the word of God. You have said what you say the word of God says which is really not God but you and your interpretation .

Deep down you know it is true, but you can’t admit it, because your whole belief system on which you based your life falls apart
I know it is hard to face the truth. I had to come to grips with it myself. It is humiliating, I know, but God does not bow to us. He tells us that to follow Him we must join Him in death. He gives us the benefit of a bloodless death, but we still must deny our very selves in order to follow Him

We read scripture that the enmity is between Satan and the woman. Satan hates her with all his fury. When we deny her or speak ill of her or drag her down to our level, we do not do God’s work. We take the side of her enemy
Her name is unique in all of scripture, she is not just one who is full of grace. It is her name, Kecharitomene. She has all that God can give, and there is no stain in her. To say that there is, does not insult her, it insults the grace of God and counts it as an unclean thing. Yet she is your mother and stands ready to help at any time.

Do you need evidence? Consider Our Lady of Guadalupe. Mary appeared to Juan Diego in the 16th century. The Bishop did not believe him and asked for a sign. Juan brought him flowers in the dead of winter when they should not be, and when he dropped the flowers at the Bishop’s feet, on his tilma was an image of Our Lady
That tilma is still able to be viewed in Mexico City today. It has been studied scientifically more than anything else, and its existence cannot be explained by natural means. The eyes in the image are arranged as living eyes, the reflection in the pupil shows the Bishop and many other people they were there when Jaun Diego first showed the image. The tilma is made from material that should have degraded long ago, but it is here 500 years later and survived fire and acid spills. The stars around Our Lady are as the constellations in the 1500s when Juan Diego was there. The stars are also arranged as musical notes which have been analyzed to provide the most beautiful music. All these are amazing
The greatest sign is that after this miracle, the Aztec empire was a people strongly tied to ritual human sacrifice. They were convinced to stop worshiping their false gods and worship our Lord Jesus Christ who sacrificed Himself for all. The miracle is above reproach. We know it is supernatural. Can it not be of God? Jesus tells us that Satan cannot cast out Satan as a house divided against itself cannot stand. Satan would not tolerate cession of human sacrifice to his honor in favor of unbloody sacrifice in honor of Our Lord.
The miracle is there for you to see, but you cannot look at it, as you would see the truth but you’d close your eyes. If you did see it, you would either have to accept it or say it is of the devil, but if you do that, you would risk blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Take a look at the gifts your mother has given you, what’s to lose except your pride?

What good is it to ask for a sign and then refuse to look at it?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You have not said the word of God. You have said what you say the word of God says which is really not God but you and your interpretation .

Sorry if you don't recognize God's Testimony as Scripture and what Jesus tells us to live by Mat 4:4 Deep down I know God's Word is true, over man-made doctrine such as Mary is the ark of the New Covenant- where you will not find one verse saying this and contradicts the clear Scriptures of what we are told plainly is in God's Ark. Sadly this is where most go wrong, they refuse to believe the Scriptures as they read and start adding their own words to His, something we are warned plainly not to Pro 30:5-6

. You have said what you say the word of God says

The Scriptures literally says what is in the ark God's Testimony- the Ten Commandments

Exo 40:20He took the Testimony and put it into the ark, inserted the poles through the rings of the ark, and put the mercy seat on top of the ark.
Exo 24:16 And you shall put into the ark the Testimony which I will give you.
Exo 31:18 And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.
Deut 4:13 13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

God made the earthy temple as a miniature of His heavenly temple Heb 8:1-5 So no need to guess what is in it when Scripture tells us plainly,

Heb 9:4 which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant;

His ark remains in heaven Rev 15:5 Rev 11:19 as its the standard of God's judgment (His version, not mans) Rev 11:18-19 James 2:11, Ecc 12:13-14 Rev 22:14-15 Mat 5:19-30

Guess all gets sorted out soon enough, I probably won't respond further on this, so be well.

 

[The Liturgist]

So the church knows more than the Holy Spirit.

I never said that, indeed I have maintained the opposite position, that the Church in compiling the Nicene Creed, the New Testament canon, and in preserving apostolic docfrines relies on the guidance of the Spirit. The teaching ministry of the Church is the means by which the Holy Spirit communicates, for the Spirit is able to speak through the hierarchy of the One Holy Catholic Church and Apostolic Church, however one defines it. This view is in full accord with the Nicene Creed.

despite no church agreeing on doctrine.

False. Aside from the fact that all Orthodox churches agree on doctrine, additionally, all traditional liturgical churches (Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, traditional Methodist, liturgical Calvinist, Congregationalist), which also represent most of the faithful, agree on most points of doctrine, including the Trinity, the Incarnation, Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the status of Mary as Theotokos, the use of Icons, certain points of soteriology and eschatology, and importantly, worship on all days of the week and not just the seventh day, for Christ said “pray without ceasing,” and for this reason we are in the process of reunification.

Additionally, all Christian churches, including yours, agree on some doctrine, such as the Nicene Creed and the contents of the New Testament. So a church that rejects the Trinity, the Incarnation, the canonicity of the 27 books of the New Testament, the Apostolate of St. Paul, and the Nicene Creed is not, according to the ecumenical consensus, Christian. Thus we do not count Unitarians, Swedenborgians, Mormons, J/Ws, Christian Science, Oneness Pentecostals or related heretics as being within the fold of the Christian Church, since they reject the doctrines associated with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church through the Nicene Creed (however one defines the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - the definition of Catholicity is disputed due to schism, and I have outlined before the different ways most Christians define it, yet you seem to insist that in all cases Catholic means the Roman Catholic Church headed by the Pope, which is ironically the same definition used by Roman Catholics, who ironically also conduct the most worship on Saturday.

 

[Jerry N.]

You have not said the word of God. You have said what you say the word of God says which is really not God but you and your interpretation .

Deep down you know it is true, but you can’t admit it, because your whole belief system on which you based your life falls apart
I know it is hard to face the truth. I had to come to grips with it myself. It is humiliating, I know, but God does not bow to us. He tells us that to follow Him we must join Him in death. He gives us the benefit of a bloodless death, but we still must deny our very selves in order to follow Him

We read scripture that the enmity is between Satan and the woman. Satan hates her with all his fury. When we deny her or speak ill of her or drag her down to our level, we do not do God’s work. We take the side of her enemy
Her name is unique in all of scripture, she is not just one who is full of grace. It is her name, Kecharitomene. She has all that God can give, and there is no stain in her. To say that there is, does not insult her, it insults the grace of God and counts it as an unclean thing. Yet she is your mother and stands ready to help at any time.

Do you need evidence? Consider Our Lady of Guadalupe. Mary appeared to Juan Diego in the 16th century. The Bishop did not believe him and asked for a sign. Juan brought him flowers in the dead of winter when they should not be, and when he dropped the flowers at the Bishop’s feet, on his tilma was an image of Our Lady
That tilma is still able to be viewed in Mexico City today. It has been studied scientifically more than anything else, and its existence cannot be explained by natural means. The eyes in the image are arranged as living eyes, the reflection in the pupil shows the Bishop and many other people they were there when Jaun Diego first showed the image. The tilma is made from material that should have degraded long ago, but it is here 500 years later and survived fire and acid spills. The stars around Our Lady are as the constellations in the 1500s when Juan Diego was there. The stars are also arranged as musical notes which have been analyzed to provide the most beautiful music. All these are amazing
The greatest sign is that after this miracle, the Aztec empire was a people strongly tied to ritual human sacrifice. They were convinced to stop worshiping their false gods and worship our Lord Jesus Christ who sacrificed Himself for all. The miracle is above reproach. We know it is supernatural. Can it not be of God? Jesus tells us that Satan cannot cast out Satan as a house divided against itself cannot stand. Satan would not tolerate cession of human sacrifice to his honor in favor of unbloody sacrifice in honor of Our Lord.
The miracle is there for you to see, but you cannot look at it, as you would see the truth but you’d close your eyes. If you did see it, you would either have to accept it or say it is of the devil, but if you do that, you would risk blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Take a look at the gifts your mother has given you, what’s to lose except your pride?

What good is it to ask for a sign and then refuse to look at it?

I think you are making a little mistake by claiming that a Marian miracle is either from God or from Satan. We can also be skeptical or ignore it. We have very little knowledge about the spiritual realm. I contend that it is as diverse and complicated as the physical realm. Consider the following:

https://web.archive.org/web/20071022042328/http://www.interlupe.com.mx/nican-e.html

Mary is reported to say these words to Juan Diego in his native language: “33 and to bring about what my compassionate and merciful gaze is trying to do, go to the residence of the bishop of Mexico, and you will tell him how I am sending you, so that you may reveal to him that I very much want him to build me a house here, to erect my temple for me on the plain; you will tell him everything, all that you have seen and marveled at, and what you have heard.” (Underline added) To a Protestant, building a temple or church for anyone but God goes against the OT, and the Bible in general. Even though good things came out of it, doesn’t prove that it was from God. God is able to bring forth blessings from the worst of events. One doesn’t have to attribute the event to either Satan or God. All things have to be tested by Scripture, but there are many things it doesn’t address. Even the Catholic Church is skeptical about some Marian apparitions and makes no definitive decision (Prae oculis habeatur or Curatur). I realize that this isn’t one of those cases.

Anyway, the technique of only giving two choices is not quite right.

 

[Jerry N.]

I never said that, indeed I have maintained the opposite position, that the Church in compiling the Nicene Creed, the New Testament canon, and in preserving apostolic docfrines relies on the guidance of the Spirit. The teaching ministry of the Church is the means by which the Holy Spirit communicates, for the Spirit is able to speak through the hierarchy of the One Holy Catholic Church and Apostolic Church, however one defines it. This view is in full accord with the Nicene Creed.



False. Aside from the fact that all Orthodox churches agree on doctrine, additionally, all traditional liturgical churches (Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, traditional Methodist, liturgical Calvinist, Congregationalist), which also represent most of the faithful, agree on most points of doctrine, including the Trinity, the Incarnation, Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the status of Mary as Theotokos, the use of Icons, certain points of soteriology and eschatology, and importantly, worship on all days of the week and not just the seventh day, for Christ said “pray without ceasing,” and for this reason we are in the process of reunification.

Additionally, all Christian churches, including yours, agree on some doctrine, such as the Nicene Creed and the contents of the New Testament. So a church that rejects the Trinity, the Incarnation, the canonicity of the 27 books of the New Testament, the Apostolate of St. Paul, and the Nicene Creed is not, according to the ecumenical consensus, Christian. Thus we do not count Unitarians, Swedenborgians, Mormons, J/Ws, Christian Science, Oneness Pentecostals or related heretics as being within the fold of the Christian Church, since they reject the doctrines associated with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church through the Nicene Creed (however one defines the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - the definition of Catholicity is disputed due to schism, and I have outlined before the different ways most Christians define it, yet you seem to insist that in all cases Catholic means the Roman Catholic Church headed by the Pope, which is ironically the same definition used by Roman Catholics, who ironically also conduct the most worship on Saturday.

Does that mean that the Coptic Church is not Christian, or those who agreed with Arius before 381 where not Christians?

 

[prodromos]

Does that mean that the Coptic Church is not Christian

How does that follow?

or those who agreed with Arius before 381 where not Christians?

If they continued in their erroneous belief after the Church had made it clear it was heresy, yes.

 

[The Liturgist]

Does that mean that the Coptic Church is not Christian, or those who agreed with Arius before 381 where not Christians?

The Copts and other Oriental Orthodox are Nicene Christians who agree with every doctrine I enumerated and which are one of two Oriental Orthodox churches to have a formal intercommunion agreement with their Eastern Orthodox counterpart. I don’t know what would make you think otherwise. I regard them as fully Orthodox and regularly attend their service.

As for Arians, no, they are not Christian - anyone in the Church of Alexandria who comitted to follow Arius after he was anathematized was rejecting the Incarnation and separating themselves from the faithful, and likewise anyone from anywhere else who embraced his doctrine after the Council of Nicaea anethematized Arius and Arianism in 325 AD is Arian and not Christian. Thus, J/Ws while not followers of Arius, are still not Christian since they agree with and promote his doctrine.