Are Protestants "saved? "

[Taken]

Nope. You're still having trouble accepting Jesus' words.

That is false.
No one has denied Jesus' words.

Scripture is for Knowledge and Verification.

Reading the Scripture gives a man Knowledge.

Man can "interpret" the Knowledge to "his own" understanding.
(Which IS what you ARE doing)

However God has "His OWN interpretation" (of "His OWN" Knowledge He has given men.)

And True enough; some churches teach their interpretation and understanding; and claim "their Church is built upon Peter"
While "other" Churches teach "Gods interpretation and Gods Understanding of His OWN Knowledge...That Christ Jesus' Spiritual Church Is built UPON Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God"...

Simon Barjonas (meaning son of Jonas), being given the surname Petro... is simple notice, Simon was to be a member of Christ's Spiritual Church...and every person who would become a member of Christ's Spiritual would be as "living stones" Upon Christ's Spiritual Church...of which : Christ Jesus is The "unmovable ROCK foundation that can not be destroyed/ like a church built with men's hands. And Christ Jesus is the Head of His Spiritual Church, with the full Power of God, that no man can destroy.
Peter became a member...the same way any other person can become a member of Christ's Spiritual Church...which is BY that individual person believing:
Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

It's Christ's Jesus' Church...and any person joining...is a member...and that applies to Peter and all the other disciples who joined and every other person who joins.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Nope. You're still having trouble accepting Jesus' words.

Nah, I accept his words. Your the one twisting his words.. and not accepting his true words.

Nope. I'm pointing out that Jesus made a play on the words, and then gave some details. If someone says "you're granite, and on that rock, I'm going to build my..." everyone knows what it means, unless they have an agenda to deny the plain meaning.

Ah, So you were in jesus head, and and you know what he meant to say. Even though the rest of the NT and OT says otherwise.

also. the fact the two words used have different meanings and relate to two hugely different things destroys this notion

You're denying the fact.

Look again...

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

You can post this passage a million times, It still will not show you to be correct.

The fact that the two greek words have totally different meanings destroys your continued excuses and denial of what Jesus truly said

a small rock and boulder are not even closely related. only in that they may be made from the same material.. To say they are both the same is to destroy the meanings of the words..

His Church is made of flawed humans. He merely chose to set Peter at the head of it, giving him the keys to the kingdom. This is His Church.

Yes, It starts with the foundation, built on flawed apostles. and is built on flawed humans, including all who belong to his church today

But its foundation (the true rock) is Christ.

Your foundation is peter. not Christ, Thats all those outside of your church need to know to run, far away, from it

I do. You could have it too, if you'd let it be His way.

I know you do. A flawed church based on a flawed human, and continued on with flawed human

I could have it, But I want a strong church, who truly can overcome the gates of hell. with Jesus as its rock, and Jesus as its head.

 

[Yehren]

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

You can post this passage a million times, It still will not show you to be correct.

It shows that Jesus was right, and that you are wrong.

The fact that the two greek words have totally different meanings destroys your continued excuses and denial of what Jesus truly said

"Peter" is Latin, not Greek. "Rock" is Anglo-Saxon, not Greek.

I'd be open to your claim that the Bible has this wrong, of course. What do you have?

And if Jesus handed Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, doesn't that further confirm His intent to build His Church on Peter?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.




It shows that Jesus was right, and that you are wrong.

Yet you have no proof. Just your words,,

Either show some proof. like I have been doing. Or humbly consider yourself wrong.

"Peter" is Latin, not Greek. "Rock" is Anglo-Saxon, not Greek.

Peter and Rock are english translations of greek words. used by Matthew when he wrote his book.

They may come from latin or anglo saxon. that is not my worry or my issue, What is at hand is what words did matthew use. Not what some translator used centuries after Matthew wrote those words.

You should be concerned with the same, The fact you are not is troublesome.

I'd be open to your claim that the Bible has this wrong, of course. What do you have?

The words of Matthew, before they were translated into Latin, Aramaic or English.

what you have is your church doctrine. the words of men

no thank you

And if Jesus handed Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, doesn't that further confirm His intent to build His Church on Peter?

Jesus handed us all the keys to the kingdom of heaven, Its called the gospel of Christ. and by it, You too can lead people into the kingdom.

Paul had the same keys, as he went to the gentiles

Your stuck on one man, Sadly its the wrong man,

You should focus more on Christ, not peter and his so called successors

 

[Taken]

No, that's not what Jesus meant. He wasn't talking about the cornerstone:

Scripture already established GOD is The ROCK.

Jesus Christ is The Rock of Salvation.
Jesus Christ is the Cornerstone and Head of His Church.

MEMBERS of Jesus Christ Church are AS little living stones, one added upon another.

It is NOT Peters Church!
Peter and all the Apostles, and Believers:
Believing, And becoming Baptized IN Christ BY Christ:
Believe;
"Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God"
And thus are members of Christ' Church.

In your whole argument You have not once mentioned...believing, or acknowledging Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, or its importance.

So perhaps you ARE a member of a manmade Church, (Peters Church, built on a foundation of Your rock, Peter).

Those in disagreement with you...are members of Christ Jesus' Spiritual Church.

 

[Yehren]

I understand why you think Jesus was wrong when He said he'd give Peter the keys to heaven, without also giving them to the other apostles.

He undermines what you would like to believe.

But instead of trying to parse a different meaning out of his words, it's probably a better idea to just find a way to accommodate them.

 

[Taken]

And if Jesus handed Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, doesn't that further confirm His intent to build His Church on Peter?

Keys represent authority.
Authority of the Temple rested with the Priests...to Settle disputes.
Authority of Christ's Church BEGAN with Christ Jesus...and is Given to men Christ MAKES "priests", to carry out Christ's desires.

Every Apostle was given Authority (Peter happen to be first)...and every man IN Christ is given authority to Recognize and Speak out as to What behavior and teaching is Right to do and Wrong to Do.

Every man in Christ are representative "priests" of Gods Word, with Authority to speak Gods Word and speak up against Ungodly acts.
Which is to Rebuke and Reprove according to the Word of God.

Because he who Rebukes what is Against Gods Word and Reproves With Gods Word...so shall the Same Be Bound IN Heaven and Losed ON Earth.

Jesus Himself gave examples of Rebuking and Reproving Simon Peter...and Rebuking and Reproving the Devil.

 

[Paul Christensen]

But, but, but... you are Preaching Christ's Church was built upon Peter. Yes?

Glory to God,
Taken

I actually thought that Paul went around planting churches and appointing elders to run them. There was no actual pre-eminent "leader" in charge. John was pretty clear about a church where a fellow put himself in charge of the church and called the shots for everyone. John was going there to sort the guy out!

I think our friend is supporting popery in the early church instead of multiple eldership.

 

[Marymog]

what basis and foundation do we have that we can KNOW which church is the true foundation?

Hi Grateful,

That is a good question. I would like to work thru this with you together.

First off, I would suggest that we look back in Christian history to help us determine that. Would you agree that any church that started thru or after the Reformation (500 years or younger) can be removed as being part of "the true foundation"?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Timothy was not in a house. Paul was talking about the body.

Remembering in the NT, escpecially in the early days, the church members met in homes.

The house of God is anyplace 2 or 3 people meet in the name of Jesus, as he said, there he is also.

Thank you EG,

Ok....lets go with your belief: The house of God is anyplace 2 or 3 people meet in the name of Jesus and he is with those 2 or 3 people when they meet.

Three of my friends meet with me. We read Scripture and determine that one MUST be baptized to be saved and it MUST be done the Trinitarian method. Jesus was with us so we know it is True because we know Scripture is True.

Three of your friends meet with you. You read Scripture and determine that baptism is NOT necessary to be saved. It is just a public act (symbol) to show everyone you have accepted Christ as your Savior. Jesus was with you so you know it is True because you know Scripture is True.

According to your belief Jesus was with both of our groups. Which group is practicing the Truth of Scripture?

Curious Mary

PS....Please read Matthew 18:20 in CONTEXT. You will see that it does NOT apply to all Christians.

 

[Marymog]

amen

if it was built on peter. it would be Peter's church

Hi,

Peter (and the other Apostles) were the final authority on what Christians were to believe after Jesus death. Do you not believe that Jesus gave them that authority?

Curious Mary

 

[Paul Christensen]

An interesting exchange, however, a question:

You are beside the hospital bed of an unsaved person dying of the coronavirus. How is this discussion going to help him to be prepared for the judgment after he dies?

 

[Taken]

I actually thought that Paul went around planting churches and appointing elders to run them. There was no actual pre-eminent "leader" in charge. John was pretty clear about a church where a fellow put himself in charge of the church and called the shots for everyone. John was going there to sort the guy out!

I think our friend is supporting popery in the early church instead of multiple eldership.

They all went to communities with a large population of Jews, who already had Elders.
Paul was an exception, in that his Preaching was mainly to Gentile's and A Mix of Jews.

Later the 13 Apostles were to (after going to preach to the Jews...), then Preach to the rest of the Tribes...more scattered, having adopted Gentile Ways, being called in Scripture "strangers"...Ethnic Israelites, but having been mixed in with Gentiles generationally, were Strangers to their own ethnic heritage.

The Apostles began their travels and ministry traveling in twos, and All had additional men traveling with them, also Baptized, and aiding the Apostles, at times called a disciple of the Apostles.

From time to time the Apostles would meet in the same city, discuss their efforts and progress and issues.

The primary focus was...
First Jesus teaching His "students" to be "teachers"...
And the "teachers", spreading Christ's Gospel...
And establishing a willing group of people to carry on, while they moved on to Repeat the same Process over and over across the land, and in the meantime "check in", "keep in touch", "revisit or send letters, or "aids" to encourage and praise or correct, the willing people.

It was a tough Service unto The Lord, every Apostle and Disciple, Served...
Searching out Lost Jews, Scattered Israelites...telling them their Messiah had Arrived...
And Paul...the Same with the Addition of Teaching Gentile's About God AND His Prophecy of God sending His Messiah And He had Arrived...to Free men from Sin and Save men...
While men continued dying, getting sick, fighting, being imprisoned...

Acts 26:
[14] And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
[15] And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
[16] But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
[17] Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
[18] To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
[19] Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
[20] But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hi Grateful,

That is a good question. I would like to work thru this with you together.

First off, I would suggest that we look back in Christian history to help us determine that. Would you agree that any church that started thru or after the Reformation (500 years or younger) can be removed as being part of "the true foundation"?

Mary

Let me ask you this

did history support the Jewish system as the one true body. Or Jesus?

did the Jews not use the same excuse when it came to Jesus?
Should we risk
Making the same mistake they did. Or look for a better way?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Thank you EG,

Ok....lets go with your belief: The house of God is anyplace 2 or 3 people meet in the name of Jesus and he is with those 2 or 3 people when they meet.

Three of my friends meet with me. We read Scripture and determine that one MUST be baptized to be saved and it MUST be done the Trinitarian method. Jesus was with us so we know it is True because we know Scripture is True.

Three of your friends meet with you. You read Scripture and determine that baptism is NOT necessary to be saved. It is just a public act (symbol) to show everyone you have accepted Christ as your Savior. Jesus was with you so you know it is True because you know Scripture is True.

According to your belief Jesus was with both of our groups. Which group is practicing the Truth of Scripture?

Curious Mary

PS....Please read Matthew 18:20 in CONTEXT. You will see that it does NOT apply to all Christians.

Your line of reasoning can be used for any church building

so again. I think we need to use something more reputable would you not agree?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hi,

Peter (and the other Apostles) were the final authority on what Christians were to believe after Jesus death. Do you not believe that Jesus gave them that authority?

Curious Mary

They were foundation stones

but Jesus was still the foundation. Not peter or the other apostles. They were built on Christ

remember Paul had to publicly rebuke peter

 

[Brakelite]

You don’t like context because it destroys Protestant beliefs.

So I ask AGAIN: What house are they in brakelite?

Timothy is a pastoral letter from Paul to Timothy. IN CONTEXt the passage is telling him that he hopes to be back shortly (VS14) He says since I am being delayed I am writing you so that you may know how you should behave in the house of God. Paul is telling them they are IN the house of God. Soooooo CONTEXT matters.

So I ask you again Brakelite: What house are they in?

This has absolutely nothing to do with your theory and claim that your specific physical house belongs to God. The spiritual house that all children of God now being to is God's house.

KJV Ephesians 2
In Christ All Partitions are Broken
11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

You had better take great care and be extremely circumspect in attempting to cast off the truths of God's word by trying to convince Christians that they do not belong to God's household because they don't belong to yours.

 

[Brakelite]

What I am seeing here in answer to the original question, are Protestants saved? As far as the Catholics are concerned, is no. Protestants are not saved according to Catholics because they do not belong to the so called true church. Seems nothing has changed. It wasn't that long ago that the Catholic Church burnt people at the stake in order to convince them to repent and become Catholic. The references I hear in relation to Jesus seem to me to be no more than footnotes. It's all about that City/state called Vatican. And it's about submitting your eternal destiny to a system of man made rituals and second hand pagan myths and legends.
Face it non Catholics. Whether you identify as Protestant or not, the Catholics here, Mungo, Marymog, BoL, Yeheren, epostle, do not believe you are Christian. And their grounds for this is your rejection of papal authority. The current ecumenical movement... The one that suggests Catholicism has changed and now thinks and teaches Bible truth... Is a total sham and a lie. Do not be sucked in.

 

[Paul Christensen]

What I am seeing here in answer to the original question, are Protestants saved? As far as the Catholics are concerned, is no. Protestants are not saved according to Catholics because they do not belong to the so called true church. Seems nothing has changed. It wasn't that long ago that the Catholic Church burnt people at the stake in order to convince them to repent and become Catholic. The references I hear in relation to Jesus seem to me to be no more than footnotes. It's all about that City/state called Vatican. And it's about submitting your eternal destiny to a system of man made rituals and second hand pagan myths and legends.
Face it non Catholics. Whether you identify as Protestant or not, the Catholics here, Mungo, Marymog, BoL, Yeheren, epostle, do not believe you are Christian. And their grounds for this is your rejection of papal authority. The current ecumenical movement... The one that suggests Catholicism has changed and now thinks and teaches Bible truth... Is a total sham and a lie. Do not be sucked in.

The really scary thing is that many Evangelicals are being sucked in and jumping into religious bed with the RCC.

 

[Marymog]

Let me ask you this

did history support the Jewish system as the one true body. Or Jesus?

did the Jews not use the same excuse when it came to Jesus?
Should we risk
Making the same mistake they did. Or look for a better way?

Hi EG,

Hmmmm......I asked you ONE question and your response is to ask me THREE questions???

I will answer your three questions when you answer my one question:

Would you agree that any church that started thru or after the Reformation (500 years or younger) can be removed as being part of "the true foundation"?

Patient Mary