Why be RC, why be Protestant

[mclees8]

I belive if God spoke he would say, who is a Catholic; who is a Protestant?
would he stand in some judgment on petie bickierings? Would he say the Catholics are right and the Protestants are wrong so let the protestants burn, or would he say The Protestants are right and the Catholics are wrong so let the catholics burn?

If we want to know who the true church is we only have to look back to the day Of Pentecost at the 120 who were filled with the spirit and pearched Jesus Christ.

They were just believers and were neither RC or Protestant. We see the church through modernday traditional eyes and mindsets that are instilled in us by traditional teaching. We are tossed about by every wind of doctrine and heap to oursaelves teachers having itching ears.   
Why have we made the institution the church instead of the body.? Why do we say on Sunday I am going to church as if it were a place we go on a certainday
The place of worship is not the church. We are  the church everyday where ever we are.
Paul said know ye not ye are the temple and the spirit of God is in you.

Is God locked up in some building or someones denomination? No but where ever two or three are gathered in his name there Jesus is in the mist, but aside from that I am first the church personally and the holy Spirit is me guide.

mike123

[larry2]

The true church is made up of all who have believed on Jesus; Catholic or others. I came out of the Catholic Church and know many believers there. I now attend an assembly without membership other than being a part of the body of Christ and know many believers where I am.

In Jesus' name - larry2

[papist1]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

[mclees8]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

dear papist I think you missed the poiint. The twelve apostles did represent the leadership of the church during its earliest days but they were neither RC or protestant.
The church was the church. They were also common and never parraded or flaunted their authority or position. They did not have castles or thrones.and  they did not ware religious vestmonts AND fancy hates and act all holy. The Holy Spirit was their authority and power. but they themselves were humble servants.

[papist1]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

dear papist I think you missed the poiint. The twelve apostles did represent the leadership of the church during its earliest days but they were neither RC or protestant.
The church was the church. They were also common and never parraded or flaunted their authority or position. They did not have castles or thrones.and  they did not ware religious vestmonts AND fancy hates and act all holy. The Holy Spirit was their authority and power. but they themselves were humble servants.

So are you saying the church did not have bishops, priests and deacons from the beginning forward and that these were the shepherds over the flock with Peter asthe earthly shepherd christ appointed?

Why don't you show me n church history in the first 15 centuries where your church is and show me their interpretation of the NT.

I have writings from the time of the apostles forward, in pretty much every decade until this very day, of the Church and her teachings. I also have an unbroken succession of bishops from the apostles forward. i would say that the burden of proof is on you and your take of history.

peace, papist

[mclees8]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

dear papist I think you missed the poiint. The twelve apostles did represent the leadership of the church during its earliest days but they were neither RC or protestant.
The church was the church. They were also common and never parraded or flaunted their authority or position. They did not have castles or thrones.and  they did not ware religious vestmonts AND fancy hates and act all holy. The Holy Spirit was their authority and power. but they themselves were humble servants.

So are you saying the church did not have bishops, priests and deacons from the beginning forward and that these were the shepherds over the flock with Peter asthe earthly shepherd christ appointed?

Why don't you show me n church history in the first 15 centuries where your church is and show me their interpretation of the NT.

I have writings from the time of the apostles forward, in pretty much every decade until this very day, of the Church and her teachings. I also have an unbroken succession of bishops from the apostles forward. i would say that the burden of proof is on you and your take of history.

peace, papist

I think you need to re-read what i said

[papist1]

I belive if God spoke he would say, who is a Catholic; who is a Protestant?
would he stand in some judgment on petie bickierings? Would he say the Catholics are right and the Protestants are wrong so let the protestants burn, or would he say The Protestants are right and the Catholics are wrong so let the catholics burn?

If we want to know who the true church is we only have to look back to the day Of Pentecost at the 120 who were filled with the spirit and pearched Jesus Christ.

They were just believers and were neither RC or Protestant. We see the church through modernday traditional eyes and mindsets that are instilled in us by traditional teaching. We are tossed about by every wind of doctrine and heap to oursaelves teachers having itching ears.  
Why have we made the institution the church instead of the body.? Why do we say on Sunday I am going to church as if it were a place we go on a certainday
The place of worship is not the church. We are  the church everyday where ever we are.
Paul said know ye not ye are the temple and the spirit of God is in you.

Is God locked up in some building or someones denomination? No but where ever two or three are gathered in his name there Jesus is in the mist, but aside from that I am first the church personally and the holy Spirit is me guide.

mike123

What you said?  Sure, line for line.

You said "If we want to know who the true church is we only have to look back to the day Of Pentecost at the 120 who were filled with the spirit and pearched Jesus Christ. "

This is only very partial proof of what the church is and was. You must look to the entire NT to see what Jesus intended for the church, and commanded it to be. this would include giving the apostles his own mission, the power to forgive sins of others, or declare them unforgiven etc.... I could go on and on. You must also remember that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the Truth, and if anyone fails to hear the church they are to be anathema(excommunicated, as a heathen and a publican(matt 18:16-20). This is just the tip of the iceburgh, if you would like dozens more scriptural texts to back up what the church actually was, let me know.

You said "They were just believers and were neither RC or Protestant."

True, there was one church and they were called to remain one, as Jesus and the Father are one.
This one church and it's doctrine's just so happen to have the same teachings, habded down by the apostles and their disciples in every age, unchanged to mean anything different. This church also canonized the Bible in the first 382 years a.d. There was no such thing as "protestants" until certain members of the one church "protested" against this one church in the early 16th century, this isknown as the 'reformation" which was intended to reform the one church, and what actually happened was it caused severe division, mostly among it's own adherents(luther, calvin, zwingli, wesley etc, and the division continuesto this very day, over 30,000.

You said " see the church through modernday traditional eyes and mindsets that are instilled in us by traditional teaching. We are tossed about by every wind of doctrine and heap to oursaelves teachers having itching ears. "

I would agree, the false doctrine of sola scriptura has caused evry wind of doctrine, because man is trying to interpret it for himself, apart from the Church God instituted. This is basic knowledge and factual in the most simple historical application on the matter. the church was virtually a monolith for almost 2/3 of Christian history, and then sola sciptura was introduced and  the chaos and division bean, and has never ended. This is what happens when you mix human thinking and ego in with scriptural interpretation. each man for himself, no checks or balances, no magesterium of bishops or cardinals to filter it through.

You said "Why have we made the institution the church instead of the body.? Why do we say on Sunday I am going to church as if it were a place we go on a certainday
The place of worship is not the church. We are  the church everyday where ever we are.
Paul said know ye not ye are the temple and the spirit of God is in you."

You may have done this, but the church is a spiritual organism of sorts, not defined by one single definition. It is both visible and invisible, triumphant and militant, including the great cloud of witnesses, and those still trudging the road here on earth. The church is Christ as Head and we as His Body, not seperate in any way from Him, with His mission at hand. The church is as a light upon a hill, for all to see. Tobe "christian" previous to the 16th century, everyone knew where to go, and who to see, and then what to do. Today it is a mess, where unbelievers have no clue where to go, or what to believe because their are thousands of ways being taught to believe, and only one of them is correct. Truth does not change.

You said "Paul said know ye not ye are the temple and the spirit of God is in you. "


So you think this encompasses what the church is in it's entirety?  Wow, what a pretext.

Does this mean we can throw out the rest of scripture as it concerns the church? Your reading is very selective at best.

I come from a background of believeing nothing and being taught nothing about Christianity, then coming to know Christ personally in jail in 1993 nd attending over 18 biblie believing churches. All of these churches taught something different concerning baptism, and I found this to be the farthest thing from unity, or being of one mind or heart, believing the same thing.

I then went on a search of church history from the first century forward and was angered to see onlyCatholic doctrine. i was very anti Catholic. What I soon found, was that I had been told a lot of things about Catholic teaching, that were not true.(worship of mary and the saints, works centered salvation etc....)  I went and studied the church teachings for myself, and did not disagree with them.  No one had to evangelize me into the church, or come knocking at my door. I found the fullness of truth in a basic study of history, totally unbiased history.

I am a true skeptic, I look at both sides of an issue and weigh it out. I am not a propagandist.

peace, papist

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I think if God were here, He would teach us all to use the spell check function before posting.

[papist1]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

dear papist I think you missed the poiint. The twelve apostles did represent the leadership of the church during its earliest days but they were neither RC or protestant.
The church was the church. They were also common and never parraded or flaunted their authority or position. They did not have castles or thrones.and  they did not ware religious vestmonts AND fancy hates and act all holy. The Holy Spirit was their authority and power. but they themselves were humble servants.

oh, you were there?  tell me all about them. What type of food was Paul's favorite, and peter's?

Please tell me what their favorite colors were.

Also, while you are at it, do you still wear no undergarments, and ride camels and walk everywhere? How about your teeth, i am sure you don't brush them, since the apostles did not, and surely you don't have a bank account, since they did not. I am also sure that whatever church you attend does not have a building, or a bank account of any sort and that everyone shares each others money and food. I also assume you meet unerground in catacombs and bury your dead there also, in the same place you have mass and the Eucharistic meal?
What about the women? Do they wear head coverings at your catacomb?

Let's get real and stop with the pandering and diversions.

If you can'thave a real discussion concerning these topics, please refrain from engaging in the conversation.

peace, papist

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

oh, you were there?  tell me all about them. What type of food was Paul's favorite, and peter's?

Paul was a fiend for Knishes.
Peter favored lobster, preferably in a white wine butter sauce.

[papist1]

So I guess no one can show me any protestant theology previous to the 16th century. sola scriptura, sola fide etc. Please, anyone show me where someone was interpreting the Bible in calvinistic, lutheran, wesleyan etc.... previous to the 16th century.

I will be back in a few days to check on what you might have come up with.
peace, papist

[Tantor]

So I guess no one can show me any protestant theology previous to the 16th century. sola scriptura, sola fide etc. Please, anyone show me where someone was interpreting the Bible in calvinistic, lutheran, wesleyan etc.... previous to the 16th century.

I will be back in a few days to check on what you might have come up with.
peace, papist

And you will never understand that your question doesn't matter at all... not in the least.

Just because a RCC doctrine has been wrong for 14 centuries does not make it now correct by default.


Like I said before, if you read the bible, especially how we are told to act as Christians.. the RCC would willfully disband itself and pay double for all past grievances (whether true or not) and give the rest of its vast wealth to the poor.  If they cannot get even the most simplistic and basic tenet of Christianity then their authority on any other issue is moot.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

So I guess no one can show me any protestant theology previous to the 16th century. sola scriptura, sola fide etc. Please, anyone show me where someone was interpreting the Bible in calvinistic, lutheran, wesleyan etc.... previous to the 16th century.

I will be back in a few days to check on what you might have come up with.
peace, papist

You mean other than the parts where Catholics and Protestants agree?  Cuz that's more than half of all doctrine, really.

The Orthodox church has been opposing the primacy of the papacy for as long as the RCC has been claiming the primacy of the papacy.

The first charismatics of the 21st century were labeled neo-Montanists because of the similarity between their actions and the reports of the 4th? century group known as Montanists.  Tertullian "left" Christianity to become a Montanist.  I put "left" in quotations because I'm altogether uncertain that he left at all.  He himself didn't consider himself to have left.

The Pelagians opposed infant baptism as effectual for salvation.

The Copts for centuries maintained an eschatology totally different from the Catholic church, and more similar to the amil/preterist views.  Not sure if they still do, though.

As for Sola Scriptura, it finds parallels in pre-Talmudic Phariseeism, with its preference for the Torah.  I believe the early church opposed this rather vehemently, though, and instead chose to be more inclusive.  "All Scripture is God-breath" apparently included the use of a number of pseudipigraphal books, when we look at history instead of just tradition.

Dispensationalism finds tremendous parallels with the Marcionites...not that that's a recommendation for them.

Speaking of Marcionites and gnosticism, there are some parallels there to Sola Fide, in the whole "you only have to believe..." bit.  Of course, modern Sola Fide-listas wouldn't agree with Marcion concerning exactly what it IS you have to believe, but the similarity is real enough.

There now...have fun.

[mclees8]

Yes, it is so redicculous to think that god would ever hae some type of heirarchy, especially with apostles first, then ordained bishops like matthias to succeed judas. It is especially crazy thinking to believe that these crazy "priests" would somehow have the ability to forgive the sins of others, or not to! phooey! i mean John 20:21-23 must be wrong.  And to think that these bishops have the power to legislate, or even pronounce judgement upon others and even excommunicate them, like ananias and sapphira. Matthew 18:16-20 has to be totally unbiblical. To think that these priests somehow have the power to confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is ludicrous, I mean who in the world would believe that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to have eternal life? John 6:54 is totally unbiblical in nature, and Jesus had to be wrong! Who would have ever thought that we must meet on the Lord's day, the first day of the week? Who would ever think that scripture can tell us when and where to meet to partake of the Lord's supper? hocus pocus I tell you!

I mean who died and made Peter(cephas) pope and then asked him to feed Jesus sheep and tend Jesus sheep? Not Jesus!!!!    No way!

lol

Just a bit of sarcasm for the unbelievers here.

peace, papist

dear papist I think you missed the poiint. The twelve apostles did represent the leadership of the church during its earliest days but they were neither RC or protestant.
The church was the church. They were also common and never parraded or flaunted their authority or position. They did not have castles or thrones.and  they did not ware religious vestmonts AND fancy hates and act all holy. The Holy Spirit was their authority and power. but they themselves were humble servants.

oh, you were there?  tell me all about them. What type of food was Paul's favorite, and peter's?

Please tell me what their favorite colors were.

Also, while you are at it, do you still wear no undergarments, and ride camels and walk everywhere? How about your teeth, i am sure you don't brush them, since the apostles did not, and surely you don't have a bank account, since they did not. I am also sure that whatever church you attend does not have a building, or a bank account of any sort and that everyone shares each others money and food. I also assume you meet unerground in catacombs and bury your dead there also, in the same place you have mass and the Eucharistic meal?
What about the women? Do they wear head coverings at your catacomb?

Let's get real and stop with the pandering and diversions.

If you can'thave a real discussion concerning these topics, please refrain from engaging in the conversation.

peace, papist


Mike
Please lets do. when did the popes of Rome start waring the religious vestmonts and why? do you really think that peter would have adorned himself this waY?   

[/color]

[mclees8]

Let's get real and stop with the pandering and diversions.

If you can'thave a real discussion concerning these topics, please refrain from engaging in the conversation.

peace, papist


Mike
Please lets do. when did the popes of Rome start waring the religious vestmonts and why? do you really think that peter would have adorned himself this waY?   

[/color]


Im just a common sense person. Im sorry if I don't meet up to you intelectual ways. but i believe my observation is valid. I know the church starteds out common. When we read the book of acts and the things jesus taught about the pride of the Pharasees one has to wonder. When did the church take on the big show, and why did they do it.