|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 19:46:36 GMT -5
Then what "church" are you talking about?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 23, 2009 19:51:26 GMT -5
Then what "church" are you talking about? Well, For 1,000 years, when the West and East was united, there was only one Church. It was called by various names. But the Early Christians used to call it "The Catholic Church" or "The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church". These were not references to the Roman Catholic Church, a name given to the Western Church after the Great Schism in 1054AD. Those are historical facts. After the Great Schism, I believe, based on Scriptures and the writings of the Holy Fathers/Mothers, that the Eastern Apostolic Church (The Orthodox Church) kept the Apostolic Faith unaltered. They neither added to the Faith nor subtracted to the Faith. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 20:06:52 GMT -5
in that case, my answer is still no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 23, 2009 20:08:52 GMT -5
in that case, my answer is still no. Then you don't believe Scriptures  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 21:35:02 GMT -5
About what? God keeping "his church" (the catholic church) from doing the wrong thing? Def don't believe that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 23, 2009 21:54:17 GMT -5
About what? God keeping "his church" (the catholic church) from doing the wrong thing? Def don't believe that. No, but about God keeping his Church from all error. Period! You believe somehow the Church started by Christ and preserve by the Holy Apostles was lead into error. Messages got corrupted, and so forth. You obviously have a low view on God. According to you, God couldn't even protect his truth in his own Church! Scary stuff!  In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 22:02:04 GMT -5
Yes, I do believe either the Catholic Church became curropt and not a Christian church...or it was that way from the get-go.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 23, 2009 22:08:55 GMT -5
Yes, I do believe either the Catholic Church became curropt and not a Christian church...or it was that way from the get-go. But I am not talking about the RCC. Which Church did Christ' started and was preserve by the Holy Apostles? What Church existed during the Apostolic Era and afterward? Based on Scriptures, there still must be a Church that have the whole truth, being guided by the Holy Spirit. So either that's true or Scriptures are false. Either God guided His Church that he started from get-go or Scriptures are false. Which is it Emily? How can you believe that the Church (not talking about the RCC) in the Apostolic Era got corrupted, and so forth wherein that is a direct contradiction to Christ' word in Matthew 16:18? In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 22:11:31 GMT -5
God did start His Church and has helped them with use of the HS. But it is no denomination or building. It is God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 23, 2009 22:18:32 GMT -5
God did start His Church and has helped them with use of the HS. But it is no denomination or building. It is God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers. Where in Scriptures does it state that the Church is only spiritual and not visible? How could the Early Christians be part of this Church if they had no Bible but were taught orally by the Holy Apostles for 10+ Years? Did not Saint Paul said that there is ONE Faith, ONE Spirit, ONE Baptism? There must have been a common belief/practices in Apostolic Church. A visible Church which taught others about the Apostolic Faith. St. Paul called the Church the "body" of Christ, not the "soul" of Christ. Bodies are visible and souls are invisible. In John 10:16, Jesus says there must only be one flock and one shepherd. Christ is head of only one Body (one Church) not many bodies and many Churches, which you are saying. How can Christ start a spiritual Church and not a visible Church? Did he not pray for unity in the Holy Apostles and the Church in John 17? How is "everyone believing differently" a correct expression of unity? It is God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers. Which"God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers"? Each "born again" believer you talking about believe differently about the Bible and each "born again" believer teach different things. Who, today, is teaching the fullness of the faith, like the Holy Apostles and the Early Church? In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 23, 2009 22:53:43 GMT -5
I never said it was invisible...people seem to see me and other Saved Christians just fine.
No, the body of believers is one body. Not multiple ones. Born-again believers who believe and obey the Bible are of one faith, one spirit and one baptism. Not individual churches. We are the sheep, and Christ leads his sheep.
If everyone studies the Bible as it is intended..without private interpretation, taking literally what is literal and figurative what is figurative, etc....all born-again believers will come to the same conclusion.
Within the CC people seem to believe different things too. Cepha disagrees with Teresa about 1 Cor whatever it was, and I have spoken to other Catholics who disagree with things the church does.....division among the supposed undivided.
Anyways. Yes, orally people were taught until the Scriptures were completed...now it is not necessary, the Bible does a better job than I could ever do presenting the Gospel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 24, 2009 12:05:25 GMT -5
I never said it was invisible...people seem to see me and other Saved Christians just fine. No, the body of believers is one body. Not multiple ones. Born-again believers who believe and obey the Bible are of one faith, one spirit and one baptism. Not individual churches. We are the sheep, and Christ leads his sheep. No, according to you, Christ is head of many Bodies, not One Body, One Fold, as Scriptures teaches. Not all "Born-again believers who believe and obey the Bible are of one faith, one spirit and one baptism " because each has a different faith! Each believe and practice differently. Protestants can even agree among themselves what is "One Faith, One Sprint, and One Baptism". Christ can't lead this "sheep" of yours because every sheep is wandering off in different directions!If everyone studies the Bible as it is intended..without private interpretation, taking literally what is literal and figurative what is figurative, etc....all born-again believers will come to the same conclusion. No they won't. Scriptures don't interpret Scriptures. Scriptures do not tell you to take a passage figuratively. One has to make extra-biblical arguments to suggest that. You have admitted before that you interpret Scriptures to the best of your knowledge. You admitted before that you do "private interpretation" (in regards to the issue of infants being sinless) Now, you are arguing against it Emily? Anyways. Yes, orally people were taught until the Scriptures were completed...now it is not necessary, the Bible does a better job than I could ever do presenting the Gospel. I rather believe Scriptures. Saint Paul told the Early Christians to follow both what was written and what they heard from the Apostles (2 Thes 2:15). Saint Paul instructed Saint Timothy to teach faithful men who will in turn teach others (through written and unwritten words). I follow the Holy Apostles, there Holy Successors, the God-Bearing Fathers and Mother of the Orthodox Church who have taught us the True Apostolic Faith. You should do the same.......... In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by alfie on May 24, 2009 15:55:45 GMT -5
Yes, I do believe either the Catholic Church became curropt and not a Christian church...or it was that way from the get-go. But I am not talking about the RCC. Which Church did Christ' started and was preserve by the Holy Apostles? What Church existed during the Apostolic Era and afterward? Based on Scriptures, there still must be a Church that have the whole truth, being guided by the Holy Spirit. So either that's true or Scriptures are false. Either God guided His Church that he started from get-go or Scriptures are false. Which is it Emily? How can you believe that the Church (not talking about the RCC) in the Apostolic Era got corrupted, and so forth wherein that is a direct contradiction to Christ' word in Matthew 16:18? In IC.XC, Ramon Well, we know the Orthodox church isn't the true church otherwise Constantinople would not have been taken over by the Turkish Moslems. |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 24, 2009 20:46:38 GMT -5
Yes, I do believe either the Catholic Church became curropt and not a Christian church...or it was that way from the get-go. I agree with you, however I was banned for that point of view one time. My personal belief is that it was corrupt from the get go, and when I say get go, I do not mean the upper room, I mean the late 4th century when the RCC started to dominate other christians. |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 24, 2009 20:50:33 GMT -5
God did start His Church and has helped them with use of the HS. But it is no denomination or building. It is God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers. Where in Scriptures does it state that the Church is only spiritual and not visible? How could the Early Christians be part of this Church if they had no Bible but were taught orally by the Holy Apostles for 10+ Years? Did not Saint Paul said that there is ONE Faith, ONE Spirit, ONE Baptism? There must have been a common belief/practices in Apostolic Church. A visible Church which taught others about the Apostolic Faith. St. Paul called the Church the "body" of Christ, not the "soul" of Christ. Bodies are visible and souls are invisible. In John 10:16, Jesus says there must only be one flock and one shepherd. Christ is head of only one Body (one Church) not many bodies and many Churches, which you are saying. How can Christ start a spiritual Church and not a visible Church? Did he not pray for unity in the Holy Apostles and the Church in John 17? How is "everyone believing differently" a correct expression of unity? It is God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers. Which"God fearing, Bible believing and teaching born-again Believers"? Each "born again" believer you talking about believe differently about the Bible and each "born again" believer teach different things. Who, today, is teaching the fullness of the faith, like the Holy Apostles and the Early Church? In IC.XC, Ramon I agree that the body of Christ was visible in the first century, but that Church was not the RCC. I also agree with emily that the church is still visible today, you just have to know what you are looking for to see it. |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 24, 2009 20:55:05 GMT -5
I never said it was invisible...people seem to see me and other Saved Christians just fine. No, the body of believers is one body. Not multiple ones. Born-again believers who believe and obey the Bible are of one faith, one spirit and one baptism. Not individual churches. We are the sheep, and Christ leads his sheep. Emily did not say nor indicate that Christ was the head of many bodies, just one, however that one bodies is scattered through out many denominations as well as some catholicas and orthodox. All true believers are a part of one body regardless of the denominational or religious affiliation. I for one think that we as true believers should not be ''affiliated'' at all, except to Christ. |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 24, 2009 21:39:44 GMT -5
Ramon- Born-again people who seek to serve Christ through His Word...that is those are the sheep Christ leads. It is not a physical building...but a group of believers, as watchman said, in many different denominations including Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant.
I do not believe in prive interpretation. I believe in rightly dividing the Word of Truth and putting precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, and there a little.
I don't know for sure...but my guess would be the Holy Bible wasn't complete at the time 2 Thes was written. So spreading the Word orally would have still be appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 24, 2009 21:48:50 GMT -5
There are people within the CC that do not agree with some of what it practices/teaches. Are those people still God's "sheep"? Born-again Believes who love and want to serve God are not limited to a certain demonination.
According to the Google search, 2 Thess was written around 50 AD and the Bible completed around 80-100 AD
|
|
|
|
Post by cradlecathlic27 on May 25, 2009 0:31:08 GMT -5
We believe ALL Christians will be saved!  |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on May 25, 2009 11:18:44 GMT -5
Yes, Christ leads the sheep. How does he lead them? He has given Apostles, prophets, teachers and teachings. Does he lead the sheep into confusion? No. Does he lead them to division? No.
Jesus NEVER said that He was giving us a "Bible" to teach us all things about Him, or to preach the gospel. He gave us a Church. Yes, it mystically consists of all those who truly belong to him by faith, but it also is a body with Real leaders, real apostles, prophets, teachers and teachings.
Jesus said that the one who doesn't listen to the Church is to be treated as a Pagan! Now, if Jesus had in mind only a scattering of believers in various denominations and not an actual, real teaching and authoritative Church, how difficult if not impossible would His command bring the offending brother "to the Church"!
We know that Jesus said "a house divided against itself cannot stand".
The "house" which opposes the Catholic Church is utterly divided against itself. Even those who say they aren't "Protestant" most usually believe in "personal interpretation" of Scriptures and find few, if any, people that they can agree with on all points of doctrine.
Are Catholics divided against themselves? No.
It is true that we may disagree, but never can we have contrasting doctrine. Only sometimes it may appear as so if one person in the "disagreement" does not actually understand the teaching of the Church. But, in such a case we have an authoritative teaching body that can clarify such disagreements. We have an authoritative (given by Christ's authority) teaching body that can say "this interpretation of scripture is correct".
Protestants or "Bible only" Christians have only one authority by which to clarify disagreements--themselves.
What can they say in a disagreement? To what authority do they appeal? One may say "I am more spiritual, therefore my opinion of this verse is correct". The other may say, "I have studied Greek, Hebrew and Archeology, so my opinion is correct". There is SO MUCH disagreement along major points of doctrine that I wonder how any sincere Protestant does not nearly despair from confusion. Usually, it is his own pride and that alone which preserves him in a "sound mind" of a confidence that his interpretations--and not the oppositions--are correct.
If anyone can show me where Christ intended such utter confusion and divisions, I would like to know.
But my Bible says that God is not the author of confusion.
Why follow man's tradition, which began in the 15th century? Why follow Luther or Calvin or John Wesley or some other man? Or why reject both the Catholic Church and the other reformers and say "I follow none of them" if what you really mean is you follow your opinion only?
If somehow we were transported back in time to the 2nd century, how would "Bible only" Christians come up with their doctrine? Would they then submit to the Church? If so, then why not now, since Christ commanded it?
|
|
;D
