Who founded your church?

theefaith said:

Apostles act in the person of Christ
Not every believer

Click to expand...

That reconciliation Ministry is now done by the elders of the church, all believer can grow into elders, and therefore all believers are called to reconcile. The Apostles were the first elders (1 Peter 5:1, 2 John 1:1) and you could see the process of their maturing under the tutelage of Christ Jesus. They are ensamples to us of the process of growth in the faith. (2 Peter 1:5-10) This is the journey to sainthood, many are called, few are chosen.

Marymog said:

Thanks Renniks. Soooo now you have me confused. You initially stated that Catholics take verses out of context. Now you are saying (in general) anyone can take Scripture out of context, even you, and when you realize that you were wrong you change your mind.

Soooooo why do you feel comfortable telling others they are taking a passage out of context if their is a possibility that YOU are wrong and in the future you may "change your mind"? Help me out here....

Curious Mary

Click to expand...

Umm. Because that's what online Christian debates are all about, interpretation of scriptures. We would not be having a conversation otherwise. Also, because hearing other interpretations helps me understand that mine is correct.

BreadOfLife said:

Once AGAIN - that's not what the Bible says.
As I have shown you at least FOUR times now:
- We receive the inbitial grace to believe which saves us (Rom. 5:1, 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8).
- We are sanctified throughout our lifetime and are told that we are BEING saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, 7:1, Phil. 2:12, Heb 12:14).
- Because we endure in faith, we have the HOPE that we WILL BE saved (Matt. 24:13, Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15)

As to your false teachig that salvation cannot be lost - we are warned over and over agaon in Scripture not to fall back into darkness or we will LOSE our security . . .
Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise you to will be cut off.”
Paul is warning the faithful to REMAIN in God’s favor or they will lose their salvation. How can they lose what they never had?

Hebrews 10:26-27
“If we sin deliberately AFTER receiving KNOWLEDGE of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.”
This is a clear warning that falling away from God will result in the loss of our salvation. The Greek ford for “knowledge” used here is NOT the usual word (oida). This is talking about a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei). This verse is about CHRISTIANS who had an EPIGNOSIS of Christ and who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their own doing.

2 Peter 2:20-22
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the KNOWLEDGE of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
For it would have been better for them not to have KNOWN the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them.
Here, Peter illustrates that those who had a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei) of Christ – CHRISTIANS – who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their own doing.

Matt. 5:13
You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its taste, with what can it be seasoned? It is no longer good for anything but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.
This one is self-explanatory . . .

1 Cor. 9:27
"I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified."
Paul is saying that he wrestles with his own fleshly desires so that he might not fall back into sin.

2 Peter 3:17
Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and FALL FROM YOUR SECURE POSITION.
Peter is warning the faithful not to fall back into sin and lawlessness.

1 John 2:24
See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. IF it does, you also will REMAIN in the Son and in the Father.
This is an admonition to try to remain faithful.

Rev. 3:5
He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.
God cannot blot out a name that was never there in the first place. He is talking about CHRISTIANS who are already saved and how they can LOSE their salvation.

Rev. 22:19
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
How can God “take away” somebody’s “share” of heaven if they never had it to begin with? This is about CHRISTIANS who may or may NOT make it into Heaven.

Click to expand...

Do you even read what I write? You are not arguing with a Calvinist. I already said we can throw away our salvation through unbelief. Also that deliberately continued sin can lead to unbelief.

Not sure who you are arguing with.

BreadOfLife said:

Tell me which Catholic doctrines have been changed.

Click to expand...

"It (Roman Church) firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Council of Florence (1441), Pope Eugenius, Decree for the Jacobites, in the Bull Cantata Domino; Denzinger 714)


846. "How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body. . .

847. "This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. " (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Doubleday:New York, © 1994, United States Catholic Conference, Inc. - Libreria Editrice Vaticana, p. 244 w/Imprimi Potest of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger)

O my! Looks as though the CCC has done a bit of clarification here. And it would appear that this clarification has so modified the dogma as pronounced by Boniface VIII and Eugenius as to now make it possible that people who have never even heard of Jesus Christ or the Roman Catholic Church might be saved. If I had not been told differently by Paul VI and Adam S. Miller, I would have thought this amounted to a reversal of the earlier defined dogma. Clearly, I do not understand how declaring that people outside the RCC who never heard of the RCC or Jesus Christ are not to be considered when accepting as a matter of faith that "Outside the Church there is no salvation."

Renniks said:

Umm. Because that's what online Christian debates are all about, interpretation of scriptures. We would not be having a conversation otherwise. Also, because hearing other interpretations helps me understand that mine is correct.

Click to expand...

Yup, that's what we do here. Debate various interpretations of Scripture.

How does hearing the interpretations of others help you understand that your interpretation is correct??? When someone agrees with you that makes you and them correct....that is until they change their mind and don't agree with you anymore then they aren't correct??? You stated earlier you may change your mind and realize that you weren't correct.....So you don't ever really know if you or the other person is correct and your just kind of winging it??? Soooooooo confusing. To me it sounds like you are still searching for the truth and you will never know if or when you find it.

Piece of advise: If you want to know the Truth join The Church that is the pillar and foundation of Truth instead of second guessing yourself all the time on what the truth is.

Thanks for your time.

Renniks said:

Yep.

Click to expand...

There is your dilemma and clear evidence that your theory is not biblical. Scripture doesn't say I go to my church and you go to your church for the answer. It says go to The Church. Your interpretation needs tweaking.

Maybe someday you will figure out your interpretation is wrong. After all, that's happened before. Hasn't it?

theefaith said:

No it’s hierarchy bishops and priests/ people

as Jesus said:
matt 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

Click to expand...

The Bishop is nothing more than an elder who shepherds.

an overseer

1. a man charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian or superintendent
   
   
2. the superintendent, elder, or overseer of a Christian church
   

You should one day look up the church structure of the Presbyterian Church's Hierarchy. They do this Biblically and rightly and as a result they have little to no corruption in the leadership of the churches, and their is a unity in the essentials of the faith.

Here is a link to a short description of the three main types of church leadership.
Church Leadership and Government | Articles | Moody Church Media (moodymedia.org)

Note: By posting this link I do not endorse this church, as I have not research their doctrinal positions in any way. I posted the link because of the brevity of the description of the three leadership structures in the church and am in agreement with them that the Presbyterian model is the most Biblical, although my upbringing is more in the congregational model.

Renniks said:

"It (Roman Church) firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Council of Florence (1441), Pope Eugenius, Decree for the Jacobites, in the Bull Cantata Domino; Denzinger 714)

Click to expand...

There were no Protestants in 1441. You quote a council without context. Show me where the Apostles taught there was salvation outside the church. Good luck with that.
The rest of your post expresses a denial of development, which I tried to explain to you.
Development of Doctrine: A Corruption of Biblical Teaching? | Dave Armstrong (patheos.com)
So you put on your blinders and ignore it.

As sacrament, the Church is Christs instrument. She is taken up by Him also as the instrument for the salvation of all, the universal sacrament of salvation, by which Christ is at once manifesting and actualizing the mystery of Gods love for men. The Church is the visible plan of Gods love for humanity, because God desires that the whole human race may become one People of God, form one Body of Christ, and be built up into one Temple of the Holy Spirit. There are two principal errors when it comes to the Church's teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Some reject this teaching as both incorrect and arrogant. Others interpret this statement to condemn all those who are not visibly united to the Roman Catholic Church. To properly understand this teaching, we must examine it within the context of divine Revelation and Church history. This examination will reveal that the phrase was not formulated to express who would go to heaven and who would go to hell, for only God will judge that. Rather, the phrase expresses an understanding of the Church in relation to her role in the salvation of the world...

...Because God is not bound by the sacraments, He makes the grace of salvation available to all in ways unknown to us. This is the basis for the Church's teaching on "Baptism of desire" (cf. Catechism, nos. 1258-60, 1281). This occurs, for example, when one seeks Baptism but dies first, or when one dies without explicit knowledge of Christ, but would have embraced the truth had it been presented. Only God can judge their souls.

The Church is the ark through which men are saved. Noah and his family were the only men saved on the ark, but even animals who had no understanding of the matter were saved with them. As the ark saved all on it, even those who had no knowledge, so does the Church, as the universal sacrament of salvation, dispense the graces won by Christ and applies them to all men of every place and condition. In a way mysterious to us, this salvation is offered to all, and God, who judges the hearts of all, will determine their destiny.
Without the Church There Is No Salvation (catholiceducation.org)

Marymog said:

Yup, that's what we do here. Debate various interpretations of Scripture.

How does hearing the interpretations of others help you understand that your interpretation is correct??? When someone agrees with you that makes you and them correct....that is until they change their mind and don't agree with you anymore then they aren't correct??? You stated earlier you may change your mind and realize that you weren't correct.....So you don't ever really know if you or the other person is correct and your just kind of winging it??? Soooooooo confusing. To me it sounds like you are still searching for the truth and you will never know if or when you find it.

Piece of advise: If you want to know the Truth join The Church that is the pillar and foundation of Truth instead of second guessing yourself all the time on what the truth is.

Thanks for your time.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...I think you missed the smiley face. I was being a little sarcastic. You claim your Church the be all and end all of truth? C'mon, your church has endorsed atrocities and harbored pediphiles, and been wrong as often as right. Why would I join an organization that wastes millions on elaborate rituals and funny hats? Jesus would have given that money to the needy.

Marymog said:

There is your dilemma and clear evidence that your theory is not biblical. Scripture doesn't say I go to my church and you go to your church for the answer. It says go to The Church. Your interpretation needs tweaking.

Maybe someday you will figure out your interpretation is wrong. After all, that's happened before. Hasn't it?

Click to expand...

If you are never wrong, chances are you are blind to your errors. If your church is never wrong, well, no such church exists.

Illuminator said:

Because God is not bound by the sacraments, He makes the grace of salvation available to all in ways unknown to us. This is the basis for the Church's teaching on "Baptism of desire" (cf. Catechism, nos. 1258-60, 1281). This occurs, for example, when one seeks Baptism but dies first, or when one dies without explicit knowledge of Christ, but would have embraced the truth had it been presented. Only God can judge their souls.

Click to expand...

I knew baptism wasn't necessarily for salvation, so why does your church teach that is?

Renniks said:

I knew baptism wasn't necessarily for salvation, so why does your church teach that is?

Click to expand...

Because it is the teaching of the Apostles that baptism is the normative means for salvation. Your dichotomous (either/or) thinking is showing.

Renniks said:

If you are never wrong, chances are you are blind to your errors. If your church is never wrong, well, no such church exists.

Click to expand...

Doctrinal fidelity to revealed truth has been promised by God to be preserved. There are many indications of this in the Bible. The Council of Jerusalem wasn't wrong, it stood as a model for all councils up to Vatican II. You either believe the Bible that God would preserve His Church from teaching error, or you don't.

Renniks said:

If you are never wrong, chances are you are blind to your errors. If your church is never wrong, well, no such church exists.

Click to expand...

I have never said I was right. I have always said The Church is right.

Scripture teaches opposite of what you believe. If you think that "no such church exists" then what do we do with 1 Timothy 3:15? Pretend it was never written? What does "the pillar and ground of the truth" mean to you?

Curious...

Renniks said:

Hmmm...I think you missed the smiley face. I was being a little sarcastic. You claim your Church the be all and end all of truth? C'mon, your church has endorsed atrocities and harbored pediphiles, and been wrong as often as right. Why would I join an organization that wastes millions on elaborate rituals and funny hats? Jesus would have given that money to the needy.

Click to expand...

Men wear funny hats. Sinful men harbor pediphiles. Sinful men hoard money. It is your OPINION that The Church has "been wrong as often as right" AND with that opinion from you it ONCE AGAIN proves my point; others are only right if you say they are right....Maybe someday you will figure out your interpretation is wrong. After all, that's happened before. Hasn't it?

Your opinion, funny hats and sinful men doesn't change Church doctrine!!! I thought we were talking about doctrine or proper interpretation of Scripture? Are you wanting to change the subject?

There are sinful men in every denomination AND you are a sinful man. Does that automatically disqualify your doctrine or what you feel the Holy Spirit has taught you?? Of course not....Sooooo now we are back to square one: What Church would you like to go to so we can settle this difference?

Patient Mary

Marymog said:

I have never said I was right. I have always said The Church is right.

Scripture teaches opposite of what you believe. If you think that "no such church exists" then what do we do with 1 Timothy 3:15? Pretend it was never written? What does "the pillar and ground of the truth" mean to you?

Curious...

Click to expand...

It means the true church has Jesus who is the truth, not that there are no doctrine errors.

Marymog said:

Men wear funny

Click to expand...

Including your leader. What does revering a sinful Pope have to do with following Jesus?

Renniks said:

It means the true church has Jesus who is the truth, not that there are no doctrine errors.

Click to expand...

Truth and error cannot coexist, or it isn't truth. The church has Jesus just as He promised, that is why doctrinal error is impossible, if you believe the Bible.

Renniks said:

Including your leader. What does revering a sinful Pope have to do with following Jesus?

Click to expand...

For the same reason mega-church pastors and celebrity evangelists are revered. Our sinful Pope can say whatever he wants, but he cannot formally teach whatever he wants.

You are going in circles with the same boring arguments that have been refuted a million times. And I don't see you complaining about encyclicals from the last 100 years. There are plenty to choose from, and good summaries available for all to read if you would just look for them. If I were an outsider looking for the true church, I would look for the one that is the most hated and why.

Bill Donohue

When I became president and CEO of the Catholic League in 1993, the lion’s share of anti-Catholic bigotry stemmed from the entertainment industry and the media. Fast forward to today and we find that the primary source of anti-Catholicism is government.

In other words, we are regressing. It is one thing to be disparaged, even viciously so; it is quite another to be discriminated against.

The first serious discriminatory act of the year took place in Utah...
CATHOLIC LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL RIGHTS 2020 YEAR IN REVIEW – Catholic League