Neither Catholic or Protestant

[Mama Etna]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

Splitting into schisms is part of human nature and the sin condition. It even happens in groups that have nothing to do with God. Take for example the hobby of watching steam trains. There are the purist groups that want to preserve the history of these machines then there are the fan boy types that think they are thomas. They clash with each other. Then there are middle ground types. Even look at politics and the sharp division there over things like how to spend money or whether to even spend it.

I would consider myself non-sectarian. I grow where God plants me. I grew up in Non-denominational churches. But currently there just isn't any in my area. So I am happily planted in a Baptist church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Seriously,? You really think I get all my information from Ellen White?
It is blind head in sand behavior to suggest the emperors had no impact on the church and her beliefs. And it wasn't just Constantine, yes, he convened the council, and later persecuted the side he disliked. His sons did the same... With different sides. Athanasius I think was exiled about 5 times. Arius regained his favor... For a while. And today, the doctrines and effects of church decisions are still decided by the one who inherited the role of that emperor.

No. For YOU - it starts with Ellen White and goes from there.
She sowed MANY seeds of anti-Catholicism in her bizarre teachings. YOU ands the rest of her disciples have carried the ball from there.

It is nothing but unsubstantiated hogwash to suggest that Constantine changed or "invented" Catholic doctrine.
First of all - it would render Jesus a babbling LIAR for His guarantee that the Church would not succumb to evil (Matt. 16:18).

Secondly, as I already stated - there is NOTHING to suggest this - other than the desire by anti-Catholics to further divorce themselves from the Church..

 

[BreadOfLife]

Amen... If thats the reason for all the secrecy, I support it!

Yes, and the obvious insurance blacklist issue was another reason.
That's why the K of C created their own life insurance company - so that nobody would ever be deprived of that benefit again.

I am the Pro Life director for my local Council of the K of C. The Pro Life cause is one that we spearheaded before just about anybody else.
According to @Addy 's moronic post - I'm committing all sorts of "evil" and "darkness" by doing this . . .

 

[Brakelite]

She sowed MANY seeds of anti-Catholicism in her bizarre teachings.

All Ellen White did was expound on scripture. And she wasn't the first. Nothing bizarre about the teaching that the Catholic Church is Antichrist. That teaching goes back to Wickliffe I think... And it was one thing that all the reformers agreed on. Why? Because the scriptures describe the Catholic Church to aT. The Catholic Church is the only entity that meets all the specifications of scripture.

It is nothing but unsubstantiated hogwash to suggest that Constantine changed it invented Catholic doctrine.

I agree. And Ellen White never said that either. But she did correctly state that Constantine established the first civil Sunday law. This was in dedication to the sun god. And history attests to the fact that Sunday as a day considered sacred in Christian churches began a long time before that. And your church boasts of the fact that it was the church in Rome, in a display of her own self exalted power, changed the day of convocation and rest from the biblical Sabbath to the pagan Sunday, for the church. This, a tradition that contradicts scripture, is a mark she says of her authority. And if she is the beast of Revelation 13, as scripture defines, then Sunday must be the mark of the beast. Not bizarre at all.

 

[BreadOfLife]

All Ellen White did was expound on scripture. And she wasn't the first. Nothing bizarre about the teaching that the Catholic Church is Antichrist. That teaching goes back to Wickliffe I think... And it was one thing that all the reformers agreed on. Why? Because the scriptures describe the Catholic Church to aT. The Catholic Church is the only entity that meets all the specifications of scripture.

I agree. And Ellen White never said that either. But she did correctly state that Constantine established the first civil Sunday law. This was in dedication to the sun god. And history attests to the fact that Sunday as a day considered sacred in Christian churches began a long time before that. And your church boasts of the fact that it was the church in Rome, in a display of her own self exalted power, changed the day of convocation and rest from the biblical Sabbath to the pagan Sunday, for the church. This, a tradition that contradicts scripture, is a mark she says of her authority. And if she is the beast of Revelation 13, as scripture defines, then Sunday must be the mark of the beast. Not bizarre at all.

Nonsense.
Ellen White's anti-Catholic drivel is not only prolific - it's idiotic.

For example - she equates the Pope with the "Beast" of Revelation, stating that the numerical value of his title equals "666".
However - she never mentions the fact that the numerical value of her OWN name also adds up to "666". OR the fact that she got this "evidence" from a well known FORGERY known as the Donation of Constantine which she expounded upon in her manure-laden treatise, The Great Controversy.

As for your Sabbatarian rubbish, it is just that - rubbish.
The fact that First Day of the week (Sunday) was designated as the Lord's Day because of the Resurrection is Scriptural (Mark 16:9, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, 20:19, 1 Cor. 16:2, Rev. 1:10).

And your adherence to the literal Sabbath is yet another shadow that was FULFILLED by Christ - along with observance of dietary laws, festivals and new moons (Col. 2:16-2:17).

In other words - like the Jews - you're preparing for something that ALREADY came . . .

 

[Brakelite]

For example - she equates the Pope with the "Beast" of Revelation, stating that the numerical value of his title equals "666".

So you admit that "vicarius filii dei" is an official title. Vicar of the Son of God. Interesting that the value you speak of is in the original Latin... Any English application is just nonsense.

However - she never mentions the fact that the numerical value of her OWN name also adds up to "666".

why would she, is irrelevant.
See above.

OR the fact that she got this "evidence" from a well known FORGERY known as the Donation of Constantine

Lol a forgery which was used for centuries by your infallible church to justify her secular authority. Had your church every officially recognised that she was using a forgery to justify theft and despotism?

The fact that First Day of the week (Sunday) was designated as the Lord's Day because of the Resurrection is Scriptural (Mark 16:9, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, 20:19, 1 Cor. 16:2, Rev. 1:10).

Oh, everyone knows why the church claims Sunday is now sacred. But it isn't scriptural. Jesus Himself told us what day He was Lord of. The Sabbath. Your church has, by designating another day as His, lied.
1Cor16:2 says nothing about a change in the day for corporate worship, or rest, or abandonment of the Sabbath, or the exaltation of the first day. Folk got paid on the Friday... The day of preparation for the Sabbath. Paul wanted to help the Christians in Jerusalem who were in desperate need. So he asked that when they counted their money and budgeted for the week, they lay some aside for this donation. This naturally would take place in the first day of the week because they wouldn't do such a menial task on the Sabbath... Which they were still observing.
As for Revelation 1:10, as I mentioned above, the Lord's day was the Sabbath.
KJV Luke 6:5
5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
KJV Exodus 20:10
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

And your adherence to the literal Sabbath is yet another shadow that was FULFILLED by Christ - along with observance of dietary laws, festivals and new moons (Col. 2:16-2:17).

It is true that Col.2:16-17 speaks is Sabbaths that are shadows.
The seventh day is not a shadow.

The following verse says that those ordinances mentioned in verse 16 are… “a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ” –verse 17. Now a shadow points to something, whether forward or backwards. Which way did the seventh day Sabbath point? Take a look:

Exodus 20:11
(11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The Sabbath points backwards, and not forward. It was set up in creation week as a memorial of creation, showing all living inhabitants of the earth that it was he who made all things and is the true God. It was not a shadow… “of things to come” as verse 17 says, but rather of things past… the creation. That the Seventh day of creation week is the same Sabbath day of the fourth commandment is crystal clear.

 

[Brakelite]

As for your Sabbatarian rubbish, it is just that - rubbish.

Your own church, in written and testifiable prose, has admitted on numerous occasions throughout the centuries that it was she, as an institutional body, who changed the day of corporate worship from the 7th day to the first. She did this, as she herself claims, in recognition of her own assumed authority to set aside even the commandments and precepts of God. She also admits that such a change was not based on any biblical mandate or direct instruction by either the Lord Himself or any of the apostles, nor of any writing in the NT or old.
Not only so, but in order to justify her acceptance and teaching of tradition in contradiction to scripture, in order to counter the Protestant reformation which rebuked her for placing tradition over scripture, at the council of Trent bishop of Reggio correctly rebuked the Protestant churches for agreeing with the Catholic Church in following her tradition of Sunday observance rather than doing what they claimed to exalt, Sola scriptura.
Sabbath observance is not nonsense. It is the only correct response to biblical Christianity in obedience to the scriptures. Your own church teaches that. Your own church admits that. I am a biblical Christian. Not a traditionalist in the vein of Catholic pagan Sunday observance. Don't teach me the Bible son, until such time as you personally are willing to obey it.

 

[Brakelite]

in every case when I presented what the scriptures say about church life they all said yes but....

It's ironic. That's the reaction I get every time I speak about the Sabbath as still being a crucial and integral part of the moral law of Ten Commandments. Yes, but...

 

[Brakelite]

You are a Seventh Day Adventist.

You don't know him then huh.

 

[Brakelite]

History needs to be understood in order to appreciate the nuances of division and the reasons why we are in the position we are today.
While Rome denies this, it is the truth that throughout the early centuries of Christianity there were Christian churches, communities, even kingdoms, that existed without any political or religious connection to the papal throne. And they got on fine, until persecution arose, just as in every Christian life. Pagan Rome itself persecuted the Christians, some emperors being worse than others. This we all know. The Catholic Church arose amidst the ruins of the empire, taking upon itself, with the agreement in absentia of the emperor Justinian, the civil as well as religious authority over the local church. This localized authority spread eventually to all churches everywhere the Catholic Church could reach. It was actually a surprise to the Catholic missionaries that there were Christian communities in areas previously thought to be pagan. Like China. Britain. India. Asia. Yet even on their own doorstep, there were Christian communities that defied Roman supervision and authority. They had the unfortunate position of being well within the reach of those secular armies that the papal throne found convenient to use as her sword in convincing them to submit. Those that didn't submit, were destroyed.
The churches in areas like Persia were persecuted by Zoroastrians, in British by the Germanic anglo-Saxons and the Picts. Along the famed silk road, there were Christian communities that arose from the middle east all the way to China. At the turn of the new millennium these came under bitter attach from first Islam under Tamerlane, then sand.
Interestingly, leaders like Genghis Khan allowed a certain liberty of religious belief, although somewhat less patient if they didn't accede to his political view. Also interesting was that his grandchildren converted to the faith, and the kingdoms they inherited followed their example. But when the Catholics arrived at these places and found churches already there, rather than praising God for his grace and power, demanded that they surrender to papal authority, and if they refused as did happen in Britain and elsewhere, there arose war and ongoing controversy that persists to this day.
Then came the reformation. Why? Because Rome no longer stood on scripture as did the early church. And, as did churches outside of Rome's jurisdiction. And what happened? War. Which today has waned somewhat. But are the issues settled? Not all all. Rome is still a church of tradition, where they view such as overriding scripture as it suits the church. Protestantism was a movement. God desired that His people return to His word as the basis for faith and practice. First, He needed to make His word available for all, and not just a few elite who could read Latin. So along came the real father of the reformation... Wickliffe. Oh, but Rome didn't like that. Oh no. The last thing they wanted was the Bible in a language the people could understand. The problem though with Protestantism was that at each new Revelation of truth, it stalled. Established groups failed to recognize later Revelation... Thus developed denominations. It wasn't Protestantism, the promotion of the truth of the testimony...pro- testament... That was the problem. Being pro scripture is Protestant. What we need to do is not reject or abandon the concept, but grow it... Confirm it...
We do that by accepting the biblical teachings that the reformers had uncovered that were previously trodden down and trampled by the papacy, discerning truth from error because none of the reformers had the full truth, remembering that they were children of the Papacy and taught and inculcated in apostate Greek philosophy and Roman law. God's word needed to become paramount. As it does today. Discard true Protestantism and you discard scripture.

 

[Addy]

Then came the reformation. Why? Because Rome no longer stood on scripture as did the early church. And, as did churches outside of Rome's jurisdiction. And what happened? War. Which today has waned somewhat. But are the issues settled? Not all all. Rome is still a church of tradition, where they view such as overriding scripture as it suits the church. Protestantism was a movement. God desired that His people return to His word as the basis for faith and practice. First, He needed to make His word available for all, and not just a few elite who could read Latin. So along came the real father of the reformation... Wickliffe. Oh, but Rome didn't like that. Oh no. The last thing they wanted was the Bible in a language the people could understand. The problem though with Protestantism was that at each new Revelation of truth, it stalled. Established groups failed to recognize later Revelation... Thus developed denominations. It wasn't Protestantism, the promotion of the truth of the testimony...pro- testament... That was the problem. Being pro scripture is Protestant. What we need to do is not reject or abandon the concept, but grow it... Confirm it...
We do that by accepting the biblical teachings that the reformers had uncovered that were previously trodden down and trampled by the papacy, discerning truth from error because none of the reformers had the full truth, remembering that they were children of the Papacy and taught and inculcated in apostate Greek philosophy and Roman law. God's word needed to become paramount. As it does today. Discard true Protestantism and you discard scripture.

YEP.... and YEP AGAIN.... The Catholics have indeed perverted the Gospel.... and once again... I delight in saying that GOD sees all... knows all and someday will deal with ALL the darkness and wickedness.... He is beginning to do so now.

 

[Brakelite]

Okay, so it gets worse. Not only has the Catholic Church not changed as many Protestants would like to believe, this fueling that lie called ecumenism, but she has doubled down on her heresies and is in the process of introducing those doctrines of man into the civil legislations of the nations. Let me quote the previous Pope, Benedict as he travelled the world preaching the Catholic "gospel".

 

[Brakelite]

As you read through the above quotes, you will recognise several major points.
A. He is absolutely advocating a single global Government.
B. He is a staunch advocate for human rights. One human right is freedom of conscience. History reveals that human freedom is only acceptable if in harmony with Rome. And later, you will see that the common good of humanity takes precedent over individual rights... And that common good is decided by... Guess who.
C. And this is where things get hairy. He bases human rights on natural law... What he later admits is a crucial foundation of Catholic doctrine. Natural law has absolutely no relation or connection to God's laws, in fact, if natural law, which is formed in the hearts of men, is found in any way contrary to God's laws, natural law and the common good takes precedence.
D. Human rights, based on the fallen nature of the human heart, he says are the key to peace and security. Where is God in all of this?

 

[quietthinker]

As you read through the above quotes, you will recognise several major points.
A. He is absolutely advocating a single global Government.
B. He is a staunch advocate for human rights. One human right is freedom of conscience. History reveals that human freedom is only acceptable if in harmony with Rome. And later, you will see that the common good of humanity takes precedent over individual rights... And that common good is decided by... Guess who.
C. And this is where things get hairy. He bases human rights on natural law... What he later admits is a crucial foundation of Catholic doctrine. Natural law has absolutely no relation or connection to God's laws, in fact, if natural law, which is formed in the hearts of men, is found in any way contrary to God's laws, natural law and the common good takes precedence.
D. Human rights, based on the fallen nature of the human heart, he says are the key to peace and security. Where is God in all of this?

It's not difficult to see the ratcheting process.

 

[Brakelite]

To continue...



Sacred and certain teaching of the church... Infallibility.
Principles of the moral order which sitting from human nature...
The Bible says... To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them. Isaiah 8:20

Benedict is teaching Greek philosophy. Which is hardly surprising seeing the Beast of Revelation 13:1 is primarily a leopard like beast, a Greek beast.



Notice the deception... Sugar coated nice sounding philosophy that sounds like it is something godly and holy, but in reality is nothing more than a self exalting plump for global rule.

 

[Brakelite]

Here is an accurate definition of the concept of natural law.



One can see clearly where Catholicism deviates so markedly from biblical Christianity. Why anyone would associate such heresy with Truth, can only be due to deception. And if you had any further doubts as to the true foundation of what the Catholic Church calls Christianity, hear the following from the horses mouth...a Sulpician priest..

 

[amigo de christo]

Kenneth Copeland and his cronies aren't protesting. So what are they?

And kenneth is not alone . There are many within the churches that are leading their flocks to have unity again with the RCC .
Many are doing this .

 

[Brakelite]

And kenneth is not alone . There are many within the churches that are leading their flocks to have unity again with the RCC .
Many are doing this .

Let's see where the concept of unity, the same unity being promoted by Rome, is coming from...

 

[Brakelite]

And what does Francis have to say??? Note the language...

 

[Brakelite]

Especialy this promotion of Sunday and his co-opting of Protestantism into the plan, is the prophetic culmination of the whole controversy between Satan and Christ... The man made pagan day of the sun against the true Lord's Day.