Baptism question that seems unbiblical

[Stranger]

Hi stranger,

I don't think we are that far apart on our statements. I agree with you when Romanists (The Catholic Church) use the word succession they speak of a continual line going back to the original 12, in this case Peter, to which they link their papal system. Here is something to reflect on and consider: You can either accept the Historical writings about your Christian History or you can reject them. The ancient historical writings we Christians currently have make a good case for Apostolic Succession in Rome.

I also THINK I agree with you that there was no continual succession of the apostles; with some clarification. The Christian Church does not have 12 currently living men that we can say replaced the 12 Apostles via a vote like they did when Mathias succeeded Judas. However, as stated in my opening paragraph, the ancient historical writings we Christians have make a very good case for Apostolic Succession in Rome and you can either accept or reject the Historical writings about your Christian History. If you reject them the burden of proof is on you to prove they are wrong instead of just saying they are wrong.

I agree with you that Timothy in no way was an apostle as Paul was. I felt I made it VERY CLEAR that the succession from Paul to Timothy was that Timothy taught to other men what Paul taught him. That succession in teaching (Timothy succeeding Paul) maintained continuity in the teachings of the Apostles. Timothy was then to teach men to succeed him and teach them what he was taught by Paul. A uninterrupted succession of teaching from Paul to Timothy to the men he taught to other men is made very clear in Scripture.

The only thing that we are disagreeing on is that you say that the faith of the apostles is passed down but we preach differently at times. That statement is contradictory.

Since the Apostles preached THE SAME THING then how are we, 2,000 years later, "preaching differently at times"? Shouldn't we all be preaching the same thing; what the apostles preached? How did we all get our different truths from scripture when there is only One Truth?

If the faith of the Apostles was passed down from generation to generation for 2,000 years, like Paul passed to Timothy who passed it to other men who passed it to other men etc. etc. then we wouldn't be preaching differently, would we? We would all be preaching the same thing.

When did that succession of teaching stop? When did the "different" teaching begin and who has the authority to call it heretical?

Mary

The Bible is the Truth as it is the Word of God. It contains the faith of the apostles as given to us. You want to paint this picture that if we all have the truth then why arn't we preaching the same exact thing? Because we are all in an effort to learn the truth. Many things come into play in this learning process. Age, maturity, believer or non-believer, etc.

The continuation of the faith of the apostles being taught did not stop, as we have it in the Bible. Different teaching began when some taught contrary to the Biblical revelation.

Heresy almost always rotates around the person of God and Jesus Christ. Who do you think He is? But of course the Roman Church considers it heresy to question her authority over the Catholic Church. Anathema.

Stranger

 

[Helen]

<snip>
I don't recall anyone really "answering" it and some didn't respond at all. I recall most saying they are right because they have the Holy Spirit guiding them. That's not an answer. That's just saying I am right. How do I know I am right? Because the Holy Spirit revealed it to me ;)

However, would you please let me know once again your answer?

to clarify this "question" you speak of.
I understand it to be: If Jesus taught the Apostles The Truth and the Apostles taught other men The Truth and all of our TRUTH is obtained via the Holy Spirit and scripture then why do we all have different doctrines? (when I say "we all" I mean Catholics, Baptist, Joe sitting in his basement with 12 other believers, Mormons, Methodist etc. etc)

Or another way to put it: Why did the Holy Spirit give the men of the Catholic Church a different Truth than the men of the Lutheran Church which is a different Truth than the men of the Methodist Church which is a different Truth of Joe sitting in his basement conducting bible study etc. etc.???? How can we all have the same Truth revealed to us but all our truths be different? Are we confused or is the Holy Spirit confused?

Is that it???? Is that what we are going to answer???:):):)

Looking forward to your response....Mary

PS....One member on this site actually told me that the Holy Spirit might tell me one thing one day and then tell me something different later on in life as I mature in my spirituality. I guess that member thinks the Holy Spirit is confused.

Well firstly I do need to apologize for my "elastic" way of writing..I agree, it was too broad.. my bad.

The question I have seen you ask " a few times" ..( hope that is better) is as you stated:-
Why did the Holy Spirit give the men of the Catholic Church a different Truth than the men of the Lutheran Church which is a different Truth than the men of the Methodist Church which is a different Truth of Joe sitting in his basement conducting bible study etc. etc.?? How can we all have the same Truth revealed to us but all our truths be different? Are we confused or is the Holy Spirit confused?

Well Mary, like I said before...obviously you have never liked any answers you have received before,( or you wouldn't still be asking it) .. so I am sure this time also, will be no different!!

I still believe ( and so should we all) that the fault does not lay at the feet of the Holy Spirit!! As I have said...it is our hearing where the problem lies.
I am sure that we all truly believe that it is the Holy Spirit speaking to us...but I am sure it is our own interpretation of scripture where the fault lays.
And, I am just as sure it is not done by any evil intent to deceive, maybe pride, yes. We only need to look at the amount of bible translations out now,to know that people are still trying to re-write or improve...but, in doing so, man puts his own beliefs into that translation re-write.

Now, if we believe that God is in everything ( which I do) then He has all thing in His hand and we need not panic.
My own belief is that if He wanted us all to get it right then we would!
Man ( us) are the enemy. I believe that in His own good time He will make all things clear...until then He wishes us to trust and seek Him, for Him.

There, I knew it wouldn't make you any happier. You weren't last time :)
Now you will probably say something like.." God does not tease and confuse us by telling us all different things."

But like I said in my last post...You must have some idea yourself why we are all fragmented as we are. I gave you my thumb-nail of an opinion, so what's yours?

Bless you..Helen

 

[101G]

Your ignorance of Scripture is ALMOST as astounding as your denial of the truth.

Tell me - WHO is Paul talking about here??
The Holy Spirit - or US??

1 Cor. 3:12-15
If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, THE WORK OF EACH WILL COME TO LIGHT, for the Day* will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of EACH ONE'S WORK.
If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, THAT PERSON will receive a wage.
But if someone’s work is burned up, THAT ONE will suffer loss; the person will be saved, but only as through fire.

God prepares the works for US to do.
He sends the Holy Spirit to GUIDE us.
The choice to do these works is entirely up to US.

Matt. 23:37
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and YOU WERE NOT WILLING.

Keep studying and praying- you'll get there . . .

You said, "
Tell me - WHO is Paul talking about here??
The Holy Spirit - or US??
Answer, the Spirit, 1 Corinthians 3:10 "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon". it was God in Paul who build. let's see it plainly. Ephesians 2:22 "In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit".

you can't build nothing without God, did you not take heed to what the apostle said? I guess not nor did you Christ. How ignorant can one be?. but just in case you're still blind, John 15:5 "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing". get that?.

and as for Matt. 23:37, I couldn't stop laughing, are you kidding, this is talking about SALVATION. so the SAINTS killed the prophets?... LOL.

that's ERROR #3, you're out.

now here are some scriptures to chew on. 2 Corinthians 4:7 "But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us". I suggest you read gills on the part, "that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us"... :cool:.

Philippians 2:13 "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure".
this sound just like, 2 Timothy 1:9 "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

NOW the last eye opener, the book of Acts, the acts of the apostles, or the ACTS of God in the apostles.

the whole bible is based around God working through people. one have to be blind,or just out right dishonest to believe other wise.

so good day to you. ....

PCY.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Romanism has caused the splintering of the Church. Romes efforts to develop a Roman authority over all the Church is the reason for all splintering of various groups of believers. This splintering began in 1054 when the Eastern Church refused papal authority. Then some 500 years later, other Catholics splintered from the Roman Church due to the same rejection of papal authority.

Oh, so your are saying that there are no doctrinal differences in the Roman Church?

The Catholic Church is the original Tree. The Roman Church is an invasive plant causing the believers to separtate.

Stranger

Gee - for a guy who blathers on and on about a "Roman" Church and "Romanism" - you have never able to tell me the origins of this phantom sect.

As for the Protestant Revolt - it had nothing to do with Papal Authority and everything to do with doctrine.
Crack open a history book once in a whole, sparky. This is getting embarrassing . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

1515 is before 1532. In other words, the Romanist identity as different than the Catholic identity, was understood, before Henry the VIII separated from the Roman rule. Thus you should not remain ignorant of the term 'Romanist', as you like to pretend to be.

Yes, Roman Catholic is always a derogatory term.

No apostolic succession is found in (Acts 15:24-36). Can't 'you' read? James was not an apostle. This is James the brother of Jesus Christ, not the James of the 12 disciples.

Please pay attention.

Stranger

And WHO said that the term "Roman Catholic" came about AFTER Henry VIII set himself up as the Head of the Church of England?? Henry was King of England from 1509 to his death in 1547.

He was the one who coined the term "Catholic Church of England" and "Catholic Church of Rome". You really should do a little homework before you post. It saved you from being exposed for your historical ignorance.

As for your failure to understand what Apostolic Succession is - it doesn't matter if James wasn't an Apostle. Matthaias wasn't an Apostle - but he became one in Acts 1:20. Apostolic Succession is the line of BISHOPS that were ordained by the Apostles and their successors - and their successors and so on. Apostolic succession is NOT the replacing of the Twelve with another Twelve. The number grew from the original Bishops (the Twelve) to their clerical descendants.

Here's a little advice: LEARN what something means before you reject it . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You said, "
Tell me - WHO is Paul talking about here??
The Holy Spirit - or US??
Answer, the Spirit, 1 Corinthians 3:10 "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon". it was God in Paul who build. let's see it plainly. Ephesians 2:22 "In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit".

you can't build nothing without God, did you not take heed to what the apostle said? I guess not nor did you Christ. How ignorant can one be?. but just in case you're still blind, John 15:5 "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing". get that?.

and as for Matt. 23:37, I couldn't stop laughing, are you kidding, this is talking about SALVATION. so the SAINTS killed the prophets?... LOL.

that's ERROR #3, you're out.

now here are some scriptures to chew on. 2 Corinthians 4:7 "But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us". I suggest you read gills on the part, "that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us"....

Philippians 2:13 "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure".
this sound just like, 2 Timothy 1:9 "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

NOW the last eye opener, the book of Acts, the acts of the apostles, or the ACTS of God in the apostles.

the whole bible is based around God working through people. one have to be blind,or just out right dishonest to believe other wise.

so good day to you. ....

PCY.

Wrong, my ignorant friend.
1 Cor. 3:12-15 is about the PERSON who builds - either on what he has been given - or upon his OWN will.

The Holy Spirit will NOT be judged.
The Holy Spirit will NOT suffer loss.
The Holy Spirit will NOT be "saved" as through fire because he is GOD.

As for God doing ALL the work - you're wrong again. Paul tells us in NO uncertain terms that we are COWORKERS (sunergos) with God in His service (1 Cor. 3:9, 2 Cor. 1:6).

Bottom line - leave the cherry-picking for cherries. Don't do it with Scripture or you'll remain confused.
YOU struck out about 3 or 4 posts ago . . .[/QUOTE]

 

[BreadOfLife]

You have said it!

No - the Word of GOD said it.
I just parroted it.

 

[mjrhealth]

Of course it was derogatory. It is derogatory today. The words, 'Roman Catholic Church' don't have to be used by those who recognized the difference between the Roman Church and the Catholic Church. Words such as 'Romanist' to distinguish between Catholic and the Roman Church speak to the same.

Being the Romanist you are, you want a single document or decree declaring that the Roman church is the Roman Catholic Church. A single document is not necessary. That those who recognized the Romanists as different than the Catholic Church, and would later label the Roman Church The Roman Catholic Church, is proof that they saw a difference. Rome wants to be over all the Church...the Catholic Church. But she isn't. And never will be.

As for Timothy's Bishopric - as I said before, things are not so just because you say they are. And you have no Scripture to prove any apostolic succession. You simply try to find Scripture to make it try and support apostolic succession. There is no apostolic succession to make 'go away'.

Stranger

When I was a roman catholic, didnt sem to be derogatory to me, it was what i was, glad im not any longer...

 

[Stranger]

Gee - for a guy who blathers on and on about a "Roman" Church and "Romanism" - you have never able to tell me the origins of this phantom sect.

As for the Protestant Revolt - it had nothing to do with Papal Authority and everything to do with doctrine.
Crack open a history book once in a whole, sparky. This is getting embarrassing . . .

The origins of Romanism are greed and power.

Don't kid yourself. Luther's primacy of Scripture directly threatened the primacy of the Pope and papal authority.

Papal authority caused the split of the Eastern Church in 1054, and was the root cause of the Protestant Reformation.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

And WHO said that the term "Roman Catholic" came about AFTER Henry VIII set himself up as the Head of the Church of England?? Henry was King of England from 1509 to his death in 1547.

He was the one who coined the term "Catholic Church of England" and "Catholic Church of Rome". You really should do a little homework before you post. It saved you from being exposed for your historical ignorance.

As for your failure to understand what Apostolic Succession is - it doesn't matter if James wasn't an Apostle. Matthaias wasn't an Apostle - but he became one in Acts 1:20. Apostolic Succession is the line of BISHOPS that were ordained by the Apostles and their successors - and their successors and so on. Apostolic succession is NOT the replacing of the Twelve with another Twelve. The number grew from the original Bishops (the Twelve) to their clerical descendants.

Here's a little advice: LEARN what something means before you reject it . . .

The term 'Romanist' was already in use before Henry broke with Rome, as I said in post #135. The point being that people already had an understanding of the difference between the Roman Church and the Catholic Church, a difference between the Universal Church and the Roman Church. This distinction shows that by this time the Catholic Church was run by Rome. The Eastern Church recognized it in 1054. Christians in the West came to realize it in the 16th century.

I know what apostolic succession is and I reject it. It is nothing more than something devised by the Roman Church to give exclusive power of the priesthood over the laity. There is no apostolic line from the Apostles to the bishops. The only apostolic succession is the faith of the apostles which is passed down to every believer. James was not an apostle and it was he who was speaking in (Acts 15:13-30). Thus it is not your 'apostolic succession' that one must be in line with to have authority.

Stranger

 

[junobet]

Gee - for a guy who blathers on and on about a "Roman" Church and "Romanism" - you have never able to tell me the origins of this phantom sect.

As for the Protestant Revolt - it had nothing to do with Papal Authority and everything to do with doctrine.
Crack open a history book once in a whole, sparky. This is getting embarrassing . . .

Well, I’m rather interested in history and I understand your grievances when faced with Protestants who keep reiterating blind ancient prejudices and utter nonsense against the Roman Catholic Church.

However, this statement of yours is at least dubious. True: when he first wrote his 95 theses Luther did not have a problem with Papal authority but wanted to draw attention to abuses that happened in the church that he thought the Pope did not know about. What later got Luther furious and convinced the Catholic Church had become the antichrist, was Prierias (an opponent of Luther and early proponent of Papal infallibility) writing:

“An undoubtedly legitimate pope cannot be lawfully deposed or judged by either a council or the entire world, even if he be so scandalous as to lead people with him en masse into the possession of the devil in hell.“ (quoted from: Did Luther Really Split the Church?)

Which I sure hope is a statement that no modern Catholic would subscribe to.

 

[amadeus]

No - the Word of GOD said it.
I just parroted it.

Yes, but is that such a good thing? After reading and studying a person should have some Life and with Life there should be understanding:

"And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh." Ecc 12:12

A parrot mimics without real understanding. I won't say that every Catholic does that for I know better, but so far it appears to me that that is all that you do.

 

[Marymog]

The Bible is the Truth as it is the Word of God. It contains the faith of the apostles as given to us. You want to paint this picture that if we all have the truth then why arn't we preaching the same exact thing? Because we are all in an effort to learn the truth. Many things come into play in this learning process. Age, maturity, believer or non-believer, etc.

The continuation of the faith of the apostles being taught did not stop, as we have it in the Bible. Different teaching began when some taught contrary to the Biblical revelation.

Heresy almost always rotates around the person of God and Jesus Christ. Who do you think He is? But of course the Roman Church considers it heresy to question her authority over the Catholic Church. Anathema.

Stranger

Dear Stranger,

I agree with you. The bible is The Truth since it is the word of God. So I ask you: Who's truth? Yours? Mine? Which church or person has The Truth?? We all have different truths my friend. For you to suggest that I, Marymog, am trying to paint this picture "that if we all have the truth then why arn't we preaching the same exact thing" is not accurate. That is not the picture that I have painted; that is the picture that HAS been painted. It has nothing to do with Marymog. It is just a simple fact.

The FACT is that we are not all preaching the exact same thing. The reason is because to many Christians think they can interpret scripture and their interpretation is just as valid as anybody else's and they don't recognize any authority but their own. They don't recognize the Church as the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15). They recognize themselves as the pillar and foundation of truth. That my friend is a fact.

There were many people who were "in an effort to learn the truth" when the Apostles were preaching the gospel. Those people were all different ages at different maturity levels with some of them being non-believers. They were given The Truth by the Apostles and the men who were students of the Apostles (ie Timothy). If those people didn't believe or accept the truth that was given to them by the Apostles then they were called heretics. We were warned about this happeining in Acts 20:29. By reading all of Acts 20 can you figure out who has the authority to call those people heretics today?

It is true that "the continuation of the faith of the apostles being taught did not stop". That has been my contention since I joined this forum. I am glad you agree with me. Since it did not stop who OR what church is still teaching what the Apostles taught? If the Catholic Church does not have the authority to declare someone a heretic or their teaching Anathema, then who does???

We both agree that the continuation of the faith of the apostles teaching did not stop. The Apostles were able to declare anathema. Who has that authority NOW if the continuation of faith did not stop???

My prayer for the church is the same as Jesus prayer (John 17:20-23) and Paul's prayer (1 Corinthians 1:10). Their prayers are not being answered. So I ask you Stranger: How do we get there?

IHS...Mary

 

[Marymog]

Well firstly I do need to apologize for my "elastic" way of writing..I agree, it was too broad.. my bad.

The question I have seen you ask " a few times" ..( hope that is better) is as you stated:-
Why did the Holy Spirit give the men of the Catholic Church a different Truth than the men of the Lutheran Church which is a different Truth than the men of the Methodist Church which is a different Truth of Joe sitting in his basement conducting bible study etc. etc.?? How can we all have the same Truth revealed to us but all our truths be different? Are we confused or is the Holy Spirit confused?

Well Mary, like I said before...obviously you have never liked any answers you have received before,( or you wouldn't still be asking it) .. so I am sure this time also, will be no different!!

I still believe (and so should we all) that the fault does not lay at the feet of the Holy Spirit!! As I have said...it is our hearing where the problem lies. I am sure that we all truly believe that it is the Holy Spirit speaking to us...but I am sure it is our own interpretation of scripture where the fault lays. And, I am just as sure it is not done by any evil intent to deceive, maybe pride, yes. We only need to look at the amount of bible translations out now,to know that people are still trying to re-write or improve...but, in doing so, man puts his own beliefs into that translation re-write. Now, if we believe that God is in everything (which I do) then He has all thing in His hand and we need not panic.

My own belief is that if He wanted us all to get it right then we would!
Man (us) are the enemy. I believe that in His own good time He will make all things clear...until then He wishes us to trust and seek Him, for Him.

There, I knew it wouldn't make you any happier. You weren't last time :)
Now you will probably say something like.." God does not tease and confuse us by telling us all different things."

But like I said in my last post...You must have some idea yourself why we are all fragmented as we are. I gave you my thumb-nail of an opinion, so what's yours?

Bless you..Helen

Thank you Helen. No need to apologize. (I sincerely mean that)

I agree with you that the fault does not lay at the feet of the Holy Spirit AND it is our hearing where the problem lies AND it is our own interpretation of scripture where the fault lays AND it is not done by any evil intent to deceive, maybe pride. Goodness...there are four things we agree on...Hooray!!!

To summarize what we agree on, and to put it in my own words, I would say that the Holy Spirit has given some men The Truth to properly interpret scripture; not everyone. It is in our hearing and our interpretation of scripture that the problem lies. None of us have evil intent to deceive and sometimes pride does get in our way when someone disagrees with our interpretation.

I would add that scripture tells us how to handle these disagreement's. We are to take our differences to The Church for them to settle it (Matthew 18:17). I believe The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15), not each individual person. Since we all have our own "truths" all of us can't be "the church". Jesus gave the Apostles (specific men) the authority to bind on earth what was to be bound in heaven. The Apostles then passed that authority to other men who were the leaders of The Church at that time. And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed" (Acts 14:23). Those men (the elders) then passed it to other men and so on and so on thru time for 2,000 years. He told them to teach them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. I agree with scripture when it says "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. Obey your leaders and submit to them." Scripture doesn't say obey Marymog or Helen or your own private interpretation. It says obey the leaders (elders). Who are the leaders of The Church today????

I disagree with you that if He wanted us all to get it (scripture interpretation) right then we would AND in His own good time He will make all things clear. He doesn't want US to get it (interpret scripture) right. He wants The Church to get it right and when The Church gets it right then heaven agrees with The Church (Matthew 18:18). If we don't accept the decision of The Church we are to be treated as pagans or tax collectors (Matthew 18:17). Once again, all of us can't be "the church" as some believe since He started only One Church with One Truth that is to speak as One with One voice, not many voices. Scripture tells us that some men will twist scripture to their own destruction. It does not say that The Church will twist scripture. I believe He has made things clear in His own good time; to The Church. We didn't have an agreed to bible for the first 300+ years of Christianity. That was done in His time, not ours. And it wasn't one man who decided what the contents of the bible was going to be. It was The Church that decided.

I will make your prediction come true: God does not tease and confuse us by telling us all different things. For it is not God or His Church who is confused, it is we who are confused. The seed is the word of God. Who is the sower of seed of confusion? Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved.

The answer to your last question in a nutshell: I do have some idea why we are all fragmented as we are. Some do not want to accept the authority of The Church. They are their own authority, their own church; a church of one. Some accept the twisted words of unstable men instead of the words from the rock of the Church (Matthew 16:18). If you know what Church that rock is that Jesus spoke of then you will know The Truth because that Church is the foundation of Truth.

I am not un-happy with your response. I appreciate your response. :)

IHS....Mary

 

[Stranger]

Mary

Sorry, I just noticed your post #173 was not present on my reply I don't know why? But this is my reply to it.

The Bible is the Truth and in it is found the faith of the apostles and so is passed down to the Church. When you want to say we are not all saying the same thing, then what exactly are you alluding to? Be specific. Do you want just one voice such as the Pope dictating what you are to say or believe? Do you think every sermon around the world on Sunday should be one and the same?

Well...friend...the Church is the pillar and foundation of the Truth and, the Church is every born-again believer. So yes the individual believer has a Bible and the Holy Spirit and can interpret the Scriptures. Knowledge of the Bible is always growing. Mistakes are made at times but the believer lives and learns from them.

When the apostles were going around preaching the Gospel, they didn't have a complete Bible. They in essence were giving to us what would be the Bible. So, the believers of that day may have had access to the Old Testament Scriptures and then now and then get a copy of a letter from an apostle. But even then the believers searched the Scriptures they had to be sure what the apostles said was so. (Acts 17:11) And that is what you and I should be doing.

The Roman Church can claim all it wants that one is an heretic in their Roman Church as in opposition to what they believe. But they must then prove that by Scripture. But the Roman Church is not the Catholic or universal Church that it wants to be. Thus their claim of heresy would only extend to themselves unless agreed upon by other Churches. The local Churches will be made up of prophets, teachers, apostles, etc. etc. They have in their local group authority to call something heresy or anathema. Here again, they must prove it based on the Scriptures and show the believers the reason for their decision.

The Church here is not going to get where you want it to go. The Universal, (Catholic), Church already is one in unity due to the Spirit. Now we all are studying and working towards understanding the Bible more and developing our doctrine.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes, but is that such a good thing? After reading and studying a person should have some Life and with Life there should be understanding:

"And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh." Ecc 12:12

A parrot mimics without real understanding. I won't say that every Catholic does that for I know better, but so far it appears to me that that is all that you do.

No - the Word of God lays pretty succinctly what the Church is.
I simply parroted that.

YOU are the one who doesn't understand what the Church is if you think it is in conflict with Truth.

 

[101G]

Wrong, my ignorant friend.
1 Cor. 3:12-15 is about the PERSON who builds - either on what he has been given - or upon his OWN will.

The Holy Spirit will NOT be judged.
The Holy Spirit will NOT suffer loss.
The Holy Spirit will NOT be "saved" as through fire because he is GOD.

As for God doing ALL the work - you're wrong again. Paul tells us in NO uncertain terms that we are COWORKERS (sunergos) with God in His service (1 Cor. 3:9, 2 Cor. 1:6).

Bottom line - leave the cherry-picking for cherries. Don't do it with Scripture or you'll remain confused.
YOU struck out about 3 or 4 posts ago . . .

[/QUOTE]
Hebrews 3:4 "For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well, I’m rather interested in history and I understand your grievances when faced with Protestants who keep reiterating blind ancient prejudices and utter nonsense against the Roman Catholic Church.

However, this statement of yours is at least dubious. True: when he first wrote his 95 theses Luther did not have a problem with Papal authority but wanted to draw attention to abuses that happened in the church that he thought the Pope did not know about. What later got Luther furious and convinced the Catholic Church had become the antichrist, was Prierias (an opponent of Luther and early proponent of Papal infallibility) writing:

“An undoubtedly legitimate pope cannot be lawfully deposed or judged by either a council or the entire world, even if he be so scandalous as to lead people with him en masse into the possession of the devil in hell.“ (quoted from: Did Luther Really Split the Church?)

Which I sure hope is a statement that no modern Catholic would subscribe to.

No - this is a false statement.
I gather that it was made to illustrate the fact that NO Pope n history has ever taught heresy because the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.
Jesus's words to Peter in Matt. 16:18-19 pretty much say it all:

Matt. 16:18-19
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

 

[101G]

and if you want to play on the words "For every house is builded by some man", then you better read, Acts 17:28 "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring".

PCY

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hebrews 3:4 "For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

Your position is nothing short of an abdication of responsibility.
If God does ALL the work - then He also does ALL the sinning.

What an asinine position . . .