Would the US government allow anyone to interpret the US constitution?

[justbyfaith]

That makes absolutely ZERO sense!!!

It makes perfect sense...try to rethink it.

How can you say that abortion is a "reprobate thinking"?? Scripture does not talk about it!!!

Sure it does. See Proverbs 31:8-9. There is also a scripture in the Old Testament that declares that if someone strikes a pregnant woman and complications ensue, if the baby loses an eye or a foot, that an eye or foot is required of the one who inflicted the injury.

And who is "WE"???

Those of us who have the Holy Ghost.

Here is the biggest question I would like you to answer: How do you Protestants decide what is truly "reprobate thinking" and what is not?

Of course there will be disagreement among Protestants over the answer to this question; because some of us have the Holy Ghost and others of us don't. Suffice it to say that those of us who do are going to have the right position concerning this question.

Please tell me why the Holy Spirit is guiding YOU and not the men of The Church?

Many in the Catholic Church are not saved, and therefore they do not have the Holy Spirit (the unction from the holy one, 1 John 2:20); because they are trusting in their works to save them rather than understanding that salvation is by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves; it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2:8-9)

How is the Holy Spirit guiding you and not the non-Catholic men who are not part of The Church but agree with The Church and disagree with you?

In order to have the Holy Ghost (and therefore the unction spoken of in 1 John 2:20), one must be saved by grace through faith. By definition this means that they are not trusting in their works to save them. There may be other criteria that those who agree with the Catholic Church may be failing to meet.

How is it that YOU are always right and they (anyone that disagrees with you) are always wrong?

1Jo 2:20, But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

1Jo 4:4, Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
1Jo 4:5, They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
1Jo 4:6, We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

Jhn 8:47, He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Who decides when a manner of things have been compromised in the Protestant church system since the Protestant system allows for anyone to believe whatever they want as long as they believe the Holy Spirit guided them to it??

The Lord Jesus Himself will decide this.

And He will also prevail in those who believe in Him so that they will believe according to His doctrine.

I would only bring to your attention two verses:

Luke 21:15,

Acts of the Apostles 6:10.

In the arena of contending for doctrine, where there is someone who truly has the Spirit that Jesus speaks of in these verses, that someone will always prevail because sound doctrine will always prevail where there is someone with the Holy Spirit to defend it.

Now, even someone who has the Holy Spirit may have a misconception on any given issue; and if in the contending phases it becomes evident that they are wrong, they will concede the point; because to the person who has the Holy Ghost, everyone knowing the truth is more important than winning an argument.

 

[Truth1945]

Given teh nature of teh Passover meal and that the early church for over 7 years was over 99.9% Jewish that is one fact.

Paul never taught the doctrine of Roman transubstantiation. There was no priesthood holding ritualistic "masses" till much later. For the longest time only Baptism and the Lords Supper were the only ordinances observed. People met in homes, caves, tunnels, fields and the message of the gospel and the teachings of teh Apostles took primacy, not the Eucharist.

Just notice the paucity of teaching on Communion and the depth of teaching of focus on the teachings of the Apostles. It was only mentioned in Corinthians because they were celebrating too much at the fellowship supper where they had communion.

Catholicism has made it the central point of its services and yet the Apostles only mentioned it once to the Gentile church and that was to correct wrongs going on in the whole celebration.

Everything we do and say at Mass is in the Bible. The word Mass in latin means "to be sent." The Mass itself is very Jewish:

• The first reading in the Liturgy of the Word is almost always from the Old Testament.
• The Last Supper is traditionally believed to have been a seder meal. The Passover seder is a meal-and-prayer service held in Jewish homes on the eve of the first day of Passover.
• The stole - a long, narrow strip of cloth worn by clergy when celebrating Mass - mimics the prayer shawl used in Judaism.
• "Amen" means "so be it" in Hebrew.
• "Alleluia" means "praise the Lord" in Hebrew.
• Catholic churches have tabernacles storing the Eucharist, the Word made flesh; in synagogues, tabernacles hold ancient Torah scrolls. Candles sit beside the tabernacles in both houses of worship.
• The priest washes his hands, continuing a Jewish tradition and saying: "I wash my hands in innocence, and go about the altar, O Lord" (Ps 26:6). "Altar" means "place of sacrifice" in Hebrew.
• For thousands of years, Jews have prayed over bread: "Blessed are you, Lord our God, king of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth." As he prepares the gifts at Mass, a Catholic priest says: "Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life." Jews and Catholic priests also pray over wine in a similar way.

Furthermore, why did Jesus mention binding and loosing authority in Matthew 16:19. Why? If scripture is all you need, why give this authority. Why would Jesus even mention something like this?

Binding and loosing authority is required for his Church that would be going through many changing times, changing cultures (etc.) throughout the centuries. Of course doctrine has not changed. Though you will say it was never given to the Church, but you're reading scripture that was compiled by the Church that used this very authority.

There was no New Testament in the early days of the Church, correct? Should we take that out of Mass? The Church is alive and changing.

Very extreme: How would the Bible hold up by itself if aliens landed on earth that looked similar to human beings? Are they saved too? Do they have souls? Do they get baptized? The Vatican Observatory would be able to provide answers.
God Bless!

 

[Brakelite]

Hi backlit,

Protestantism defined:
adherence to the forms of Christian doctrine which are generally regarded as Protestant rather than Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.


That is true. There are only a few Protestant churches that have "compromised in all manner of things".

Who decides when a manner of things have been compromised in the Protestant church system since the Protestant system allows for anyone to believe whatever they want as long as they believe the Holy Spirit guided them to it??

Curious Mary

Scripture. One may claim the holy Spirit as a guide, as your own church does, but scripture is the final arbiter.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Protestantism teaches that you can interpret Scripture anyway you want and some have interpreted it to say that abortion is ok. Sooooo I am Not throwing stones PW....Just stating facts.

Pope Francis is not The Church. The Pope is fallible but The Church is not. Sooooo you can quote the person the Pope all day long. It isn't Church doctrine.

Besides that you should get more up to date info instead of 7 year old news stories. Francis (and The Church) has made it very clear that the ACT of homosexuality is a sin. And you should be agreeing with the Pope and The Church since that is what Scripture teaches.

You can harp on Protestantism all you want. Have a blast! After the way you treated me recently, I don’t have anything further to say to you on this topic.

 

[Brakelite]

There are only a few Protestant churches that have "compromised in all manner of things".

I didn't say there were 'only a few'. I said tere were some who had departed from Protestant principles in many areas. Protestantism has some specific beliefs. Very few today hold to them...a few don't hold to any of them at all. And only one I know of holds to them all.
Some churches focus on Calvin to the exclusion of Luther and later reformers. Some hold to Luther to the exclusion of Smith who started the baptists. Others hold to this reformer, others to that reformer. We as Adventists believe that all the reformers had something to offer by way of revelation and truth, and their various teachings must be taken as a whole, compared with scripture, hold fast to that which is true, and reject that which is false. Like I said, it's a narrow road to life.

Protestantism defined:
adherence to the forms of Christian doctrine which are generally regarded as Protestant rather than Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.

That is hardly a definition. It's a generalization.

 

[Marymog]

This is a misnaming of what non-Catholics actually teach and believe.

There is only one interpretation of SCripture- what is written in light of all other passages relating to what is written in that topic.

There are many applications to the one interpretation at times and that is what the individual is allowed to discover between them and god.

Hi Ronald,

To help me better understand what you are saying I will give you a scenario:

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “A” believes one must be water baptized and that baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21 etc. etc).

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “B” believes when one gets baptized it is a public showing that you are Christian and it doesn’t save you.

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “C” believes baptism is not necessary at all.

That covers your many applications to one interpretation scenario. All three of them have been “allowed to discover between them and God’ what THEY personally believe.

My questions to you are: If A is right, baptism saves and is necessary then B and C Possibly won’t be saved. How do we rectify that?

How are we fulfilling Jesus prayer that we are all one if we all are able to discover between us and God what the truth is?

 

[Marymog]

You can harp on Protestantism all you want. Have a blast! After the way you treated me recently, I don’t have anything further to say to you on this topic.

Curious......What did I do to you that pushes you to the point that you have nothing further to say?

Not harping on Protestantism....Just stating a fact!!!

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Scripture. One may claim the holy Spirit as a guide, as your own church does, but scripture is the final arbiter.

Hi Backlit,

All denominations claim the Holy Spirit has guided them into using Scripture to come to the Truth to establish their doctrine.

Can you tell me which denominations were actually guided by the Holy Spirit in regards to baptism?

A. Denominations that teach water baptism is necessary and saves you

OR

B. The denominations that teach water baptism is not necessary for salvation

Curious Mary

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Curious......What did I do to you that pushes you to the point that you have nothing further to say?

Not harping on Protestantism....Just stating a fact!!!

Mary

It told you what offended me. Blessings to you, and I mean this!

 

[amadeus]

Hi Ronald,

To help me better understand what you are saying I will give you a scenario:

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “A” believes one must be water baptized and that baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21 etc. etc).

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “B” believes when one gets baptized it is a public showing that you are Christian and it doesn’t save you.

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “C” believes baptism is not necessary at all.

That covers your many applications to one interpretation scenario. All three of them have been “allowed to discover between them and God’ what THEY personally believe.

My questions to you are: If A is right, baptism saves and is necessary then B and C Possibly won’t be saved. How do we rectify that?

How are we fulfilling Jesus prayer that we are all one if we all are able to discover between us and God what the truth is?

Your questions were not specifically directly to me, but if I may...

Considering what Paul wrote in the following verse, how are we to approach and respond to your questions?

"For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." II Cor 10:12

 

[Brakelite]

Hi Backlit,

All denominations claim the Holy Spirit has guided them into using Scripture to come to the Truth to establish their doctrine.

Can you tell me which denominations were actually guided by the Holy Spirit in regards to baptism?

A. Denominations that teach water baptism is necessary and saves you

OR

B. The denominations that teach water baptism is not necessary for salvation

Curious Mary

You forgot several other options. Sprinkling once meaning salvation... Sprinkling three times... No baptism at all. None of which is in scripture. So what do you make of that?

 

[justbyfaith]

My questions to you are: If A is right, baptism saves and is necessary then B and C Possibly won’t be saved. How do we rectify that?

Baptism is not necessary (Romans 10:13) although if one receives baptism in faith, it has the power to save him (Mark 16:16).

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Everything we do and say at Mass is in the Bible. The word Mass in latin means "to be sent." The Mass itself is very Jewish:

• The first reading in the Liturgy of the Word is almost always from the Old Testament.
• The Last Supper is traditionally believed to have been a seder meal. The Passover seder is a meal-and-prayer service held in Jewish homes on the eve of the first day of Passover.
• The stole - a long, narrow strip of cloth worn by clergy when celebrating Mass - mimics the prayer shawl used in Judaism.
• "Amen" means "so be it" in Hebrew.
• "Alleluia" means "praise the Lord" in Hebrew.
• Catholic churches have tabernacles storing the Eucharist, the Word made flesh; in synagogues, tabernacles hold ancient Torah scrolls. Candles sit beside the tabernacles in both houses of worship.
• The priest washes his hands, continuing a Jewish tradition and saying: "I wash my hands in innocence, and go about the altar, O Lord" (Ps 26:6). "Altar" means "place of sacrifice" in Hebrew.
• For thousands of years, Jews have prayed over bread: "Blessed are you, Lord our God, king of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth." As he prepares the gifts at Mass, a Catholic priest says: "Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life." Jews and Catholic priests also pray over wine in a similar way.

the first 5 points I agree with wholeheartedly!
point 6. Jesus is the word made flesh- not an unleavened wafer.
Point 7.We have no altar for we have no sacrifice. Jesus sacrifice was once for all time! There is no "perpetual sacrifice of the mass". We have no need to "replay ' His crucifixion every time we celebrate! We recall, not redo His death.
Point 8. I think all believing churches pray over the bread and wine of the Lords Supper! As we should pray over every meal in thanks!

Furthermore, why did Jesus mention binding and loosing authority in Matthew 16:19. Why? If scripture is all you need, why give this authority. Why would Jesus even mention something like this?

Binding and loosing authority is required for his Church that would be going through many changing times, changing cultures (etc.) throughout the centuries. Of course doctrine has not changed. Though you will say it was never given to the Church, but you're reading scripture that was compiled by the Church that used this very authority.

Sorry but that binding and loosing authority has to do ONLY with church discipline.

15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

No one has the authority or right to take a passage out of its context and make it apply to non related issues like you say the RC church does.

There was no New Testament in the early days of the Church, correct? Should we take that out of Mass? The Church is alive and changing.

Very extreme: How would the Bible hold up by itself if aliens landed on earth that looked similar to human beings? Are they saved too? Do they have souls? Do they get baptized? The Vatican Observatory would be able to provide answers.
God Bless!

But the NT was at every fellowship in teh first century. It was spoken and read from the letters that formed the NT.

The Vatican Observatory sold itself out when the Church with Vatican 2 accepted evolution and the big bang!

If aliens landed here All one need to do is to ask them one question to know if they are good or evil. Who is Lord? If they do not answer Jesus? They are evil!

Remember this from Gods Word:

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Hi Ronald,

To help me better understand what you are saying I will give you a scenario:

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “A” believes one must be water baptized and that baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21 etc. etc).

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “B” believes when one gets baptized it is a public showing that you are Christian and it doesn’t save you.

Using Scripture in light of all other passages relating to baptism Protestant “C” believes baptism is not necessary at all.

That covers your many applications to one interpretation scenario. All three of them have been “allowed to discover between them and God’ what THEY personally believe.

My questions to you are: If A is right, baptism saves and is necessary then B and C Possibly won’t be saved. How do we rectify that?

How are we fulfilling Jesus prayer that we are all one if we all are able to discover between us and God what the truth is?

We don't! Simply because the bible in light of all other passages unambiguously declares water Baptism doesn't save! So B is right biblically.

Simply accepting what a church teaches without investigating is foolishness!

Most of the arguments that we see are because people accept a churches teachings without looking at the word for themselves!
Many people hold bad doctrine because they are new believers and just starting their walk with God.
Many people hold bad doctrine because they are lazy and do not study to show themselves approved unto God!
Many people hold bad doctrine because they were taught to view SCripture in a false way.
Many people hold bad doctrine because they simply accept the bad doctrine from a church who has held it for however long!

Do I believe I hoild right views in all things I believe in ? Yes I do? am I 100% right? Most likely not- I am human! But to not believe in the things you believe in requires one of those coats with the long sleeves!

Have I and can I change my mind abou tmy beliefs? Absolutely! But after being a student of Gods Word for 46 years, I do have at least some grasp of SCripture. If I am to change, I need a better argumetn from Gods Word and not form a man made denomination or allegorical view of teh clear words of SCripture!

I do not even accept teh "reasonable argument". The only question a believer should pose when faced with spiritual teachings is not, is it logical, is it reasonable, does it sound holy, but the only question to be answered is: IS IT BIBLICAL! If it was good enough for Jesus, it sure is good enough for us!

 

[justbyfaith]

If aliens landed here All one need to do is to ask them one question to know if they are good or evil. Who is Lord? If they do not answer Jesus? They are evil!

Aliens if they arrived would very likely have no knowledge of the name of Jesus and it would be our duty to preach it to them.

 

[Truth1945]

But the NT was at every fellowship in teh first century. It was spoken and read from the letters that formed the NT.

At every fellowship in the first century? And printing presses too, iPads, etc...

According to history, Acts of the Apostles was written in 60AD. And the Gospels were written from 60AD to 110AD. Jesus died rose somewhere around 30AD.

Can you share with me your evidence? Not opinions from somebody, just facts... Maybe the evidence used from your bible college, etc.

 

[justbyfaith]

At every fellowship in the first century? And printing presses too, iPads, etc...

According to history, Acts of the Apostles was written in 60AD. And the Gospels were written from 60AD to 110AD. Jesus died rose somewhere around 30AD.

Can you share with me your evidence? Not opinions from somebody, just facts... Maybe the evidence used from your bible college, etc.

Act 6:7, And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

 

[Truth1945]

Act 6:7, And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

Thank you! That was my whole point!

 

[justbyfaith]

Thank you! That was my whole point!

It was early on in the church that the word of God increased; my point was that the New Testament was very likely completed early on in the 1st Century.

 

[Truth1945]

It was early on in the church that the word of God increased; my point was that the New Testament was very likely completed early on in the 1st Century.

Facts please, not theories. Facts! I'm very interested to learn if it's facts.

I would love to join your "bible only" believers if you would show me facts. My life would be much easier! I wouldn't have to carrier this darn cross anymore! I'd be done and saved! Please show me the facts!

Thanks!