According to Jesus...

[francisdesales]

Contrary to what you are going to try to assert, FD, the CHURCH was copying those letters and passing them around for doctrine LONG BEFORE the RCC EVER was used to bring them together.

The Catholic Church was defending the faith given by the Apostles by rejecting Gnostic writings in the first century...

Thus, what we believe is the Bible is dependent upon the defense of what WE call "orthodox Christianity". Without it, you'd be looking at a mass of writings, having no clue which was inspired by God and which wasn't. Even Luther recognized this. The individual writings are not self-authenticating.

You seem to be under the delusion they were hidden somewhere and the RCC found them and brought them out into the light or something.

You seem not able to follow what I said... Maybe I can put it another way.

Are you aware of ancient Christianity and the diversity of writings that existed back then? You have your Bible and you think 27 books were all that was written by Christians of the first few centuries? Numerous other books were rejected, despite having "apostolic authority", because the Church continued to know the teachings of the Apostles via oral tradition and knew that the contents of certain writings did not mesh with what they were taught, thus, they were rejected.

Praise the Church, otherwise, you'd be worshiping some weird combination of demi-gods and godlets and angels... maybe rejecting marriage and living on herbs and weeds...

Those writings were out IN THE CHURCH and being copied over and over by hand LONG BEFORE the RCC EVER got involved.

It sounds like you need a history lesson on when the Catholic Church came into existence! The fact that you say "RCC" tells me you are clueless, since the Catholic Church wasn't called that until the Protestant Reformation by the Anglicans... :biglaugh

 

[Guest]

It sounds like you need a history lesson on when the Catholic Church came into existence!

no, I dont.
You see the RCC quite differently than I do, FD.
I see a make believer named Constantine trying to reinvigorate a dying empire by legalizing and then paganizing his own brand of churchianity using perverse, unscriptural teachings circulated by men from the beginning who crept in among us and brought with them godless heresies such as pennance for sin and confession to priests.

I know the historical details, friend, I simply dont interpret them as a Roman Catholic would.


That all said, I stick to my story about the scriptures.
The RCC deserves no big thanks here for simply gathering up what was ALREADY in circulation in the church.
His TRUE church would have survived without the RCC's efforts.

 

[Guest]

It is my conviction that churches are condoning unbiblical divorces and remarriages.

The church has no authority in the matter. She is only authorized to make a determination if she believes one or both divorced spouses sinned, but as far as 'condoning' it or allowing it, she is not authorized to stop it or step in to try to control it.
The ONLY option available to the church is what the RCC might do today, which is to cast out those who they believe to be in sin.
Paul lays this out VERY clearly in 1 Corinthians Chapter 5.
Its the same with heretics. Scripture says to warn them once, then a second time, then to reject them.
The church doesnt have authority to do anything beyond disassociation, Im afraid.

I just quoted what Jesus says

So have I, gent....just quoting what Jesus SAYS.
And when what He SAYS is aimed in your direction you put Him on ignore...dont you ?

You have been making excuses for churches' disobedience one after another.

Just as YOU have exempted yourself from OBEYING the Lords CLEAR commandment here.
*IF* you actually BELIEVED what you tell OTHERS to do, I'd have my check by now.

 

[shad]

OSAS and UR doctrines are wrong. Here is what Jesus says:

Matthew 24:12-13 (New International Version)
12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.

Matthew 24:39-41 (New International Version)
39and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.

Matthew 24:50-51 (New International Version)
50The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 25:11-13 (New International Version)
11"Later the others also came. 'Sir! Sir!' they said. 'Open the door for us!'
12"But he replied, 'I tell you the truth, I don't know you.'
13"Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

Matthew 25:28-30 (New International Version)
28" 'Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents. 29For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 30And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Matthew 25:45-46 (New International Version)
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Revelation 2:7 (New International Version)
7He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.

Revelation 2:11 (New International Version)
11He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death.

Revelation 2:17 (New International Version)
17He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.

Revelation 3:5 (New International Version)
5He 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.

Revelation 3:10-12 (New International Version)
10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name.

 

[francisdesales]

I see a make believer named Constantine trying to reinvigorate a dying empire by legalizing and then paganizing his own brand of churchianity using perverse, unscriptural teachings circulated by men from the beginning who crept in among us and brought with them godless heresies such as pennance for sin and confession to priests.

That's funny, because confession to priests and the rest of the community in public was part of Church practice well before Constantine. Get your facts straight. Catholicism exists long before Constantine was even born.

I know the historical details, friend, I simply dont interpret them as a Roman Catholic would.

I am not convinced that you do know the "historical details". So far, you've been wrong; it is the usual propaganda of Protestants who just don't know ancient Church history. It is not unusual. The vast majority of Protestants are clueless on history before 300 AD, they just parrot the "Constantine formed RCC" nonsense so they don't have to worry themselves about the fact that Catholicism was alive and healthy several hundred years before Constantine. By even saying "RCC", it's a clue that you are ignorant about history.

That all said, I stick to my story about the scriptures.
The RCC deserves no big thanks here for simply gathering up what was ALREADY in circulation in the church.

Like I said, you are just talking without any actual knowledge of history. The Gospel of Thomas was also in circulation, as were dozens of other writings. So was the many other writings that are now part of the Nag Hammadi Library. You don't know what you are talking about becasue you presume that there were 27 books written and everyone had a copy they downloaded from the internet with a big "X" to mark "Word of God"....

Maybe you can begin by telling me how YOU would know that "Philemon" is the Word of God, if all you had was a copy of it, separate from any tradition? I would like to hear this...

His TRUE church would have survived without the RCC's efforts.

The Catholic Church subsists within the Church of Jesus Christ. God's Spirit continues to abide within His Body, the Church. Even the classic Reformers were able to appreciate that the Catholic Church brought the Word of God into their century, unblemished.

 

[Guest]

That's funny, because confession to priests and the rest of the community in public was part of Church practice well before Constantine. Get your facts straight. Catholicism exists long before Constantine was even born.

No,...you had simply ought to learn to READ before you post.....then maybe your conclusions wont be so erroneous.
HERE is what I SAID, gent.

using perverse, unscriptural teachings circulated by men from the beginning who crept in among us and brought with them godless heresies such as pennance for sin and confession to priests.

Getting it now ?
The FALSE TEACHINGS were THERE ALREADY....

Do I need to use a bigger crayon or does it make sense this time ?

 

[Guest]

I am not convinced that you do know the "historical details".

Unfortunately for you I typically dont give a rats behind if I convince the opposition or not. It isnt in my agenda...

So far, you've been wrong;

No, so far youve been spewing out responses without READING what was said to you.

it is the usual propaganda of Protestants who just don't know ancient Church history. It is not unusual.

Whats not unusual is for RCC types who get cornered to make ignorant comments that the other guy must not know church history.
We've done this before, you and I.....even if you dont realize it.

How about you stick to the facts and quite pretending like you are the only one with a history book and a bible....sound good ?

The vast majority of Protestants are clueless on history before 300 AD, they just parrot the "Constantine formed RCC" nonsense so they don't have to worry themselves about the fact that Catholicism was alive and healthy several hundred years before Constantine.

Sorry chap but I parrot nothing. Everything I present is my own thoughts from years of study.
And let me guess...youre claim is that YOU WERE THERE and NOT having to rely on WRITTEN material from that period and historians...right ?

...yawn...

By even saying "RCC", it's a clue that you are ignorant about history.

By even saying that Im clueless because I use RCC its a clue that you are quite desperate and will grab onto any irrelevance you can to save some face here.
It doesnt dawn on you that Im intentionally using RCC, does it ?
Now....why would I intentionally use RCC ? Any idea ? Im betting not.

 

[Guest]

Like I said, you are just talking without any actual knowledge of history.

Again, stop worrying your pretty little head about my knowledge of history and stick to facts....is that too complicated a concept for you to grasp .....bigger crayon ?

The Gospel of Thomas was also in circulation, as were dozens of other writings.

Irrelevant.
That doesnt mean that they were in use in every group out there.
And THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT that there WERE HERESIES IN THE CHURCH before Constantine came into the picture !

His TRUE church would have survived with or without the RCC's interference....

So was the many other writings that are now part of the Nag Hammadi Library.

Again...so what ?
There WERE false teachings out there..it does NOT show that His TRUE church was corrupted by them !

You don't know what you are talking about becasue you presume that there were 27 books written and everyone had a copy they downloaded from the internet with a big "X" to mark "Word of God"....

No YOU dont know what youre talking about because you only believe what your medicine bag witch doctor magisterium TELLS you to believe.
Enough of the personal assaults or would you like to continue ?

Maybe you can begin by telling me how YOU would know that "Philemon" is the Word of God, if all you had was a copy of it, separate from any tradition? I would like to hear this...

Thats pretty good seeing that since the RCC took it upon herself to gather up the letters and make a book out of it that Ive pretty much got little choice BUT to use the bible I have today.

1900 years ago.....things would have been different, now wouldnt they ?

That all said *I* trust GOD...not vile men like Constantine....and since I trust God I understand that He uses even the evil to His purpose.....in this case to protect His word.

 

[Guest]

The Catholic Church subsists within the Church of Jesus Christ. God's Spirit continues to abide within His Body, the Church. Even the classic Reformers were able to appreciate that the Catholic Church brought the Word of God into their century, unblemished.

As I said, I trust God...even to use evil men....to do His will.
That the RCC was used to do His will and protect His word say absolutely nothing about the RCC itself nor its position in God. God even used an evil man called Pharoah to do His will....forcibly even....so it isnt saying much to show that He used Constantine in like manner.

 

[francisdesales]

[

using perverse, unscriptural teachings circulated by men from the beginning who crept in among us and brought with them godless heresies such as pennance for sin and confession to priests.

Getting it now ?
The FALSE TEACHINGS were THERE ALREADY....

Do I need to use a bigger crayon or does it make sense this time ?

No, I wouldn't want to pull you away from your crayons and kindergarten level knowledge of ancient church history...

the bible itself is the source of the firsts and second century act of "penance" and "confession to priests". Once you get beyond those ten verses pastor billy bob gave you, you might see it...

 

[francisdesales]

I am not convinced that you do know the "historical details".

Unfortunately for you I typically dont give a rats behind if I convince the opposition or not. It isnt in my agenda...

I realize your agenda has nothing to do with sensible discussion.

Thanks for making that clear. Judging on how you treat others who disagree with you, such as Shad on this thread, it seems obvious what your agenda is, belittling others who disagree with you while providing nothing logical to support your case. It's one thing to disagree with someone, another to play your childish bully games with someone you don't even know...

What, are you in sixth grade or something? Grow up.

Now, if you want to actually discuss something without condescending to me with your supposed "mightier than thou" attitude, but light on the knowledge, let me know...

Adios

 

[Guest]

[

using perverse, unscriptural teachings circulated by men from the beginning who crept in among us and brought with them godless heresies such as pennance for sin and confession to priests.

Getting it now ?
The FALSE TEACHINGS were THERE ALREADY....

Do I need to use a bigger crayon or does it make sense this time ?

No, I wouldn't want to pull you away from your crayons and kindergarten level knowledge of ancient church history...

...yawn...
Anything else ?

the bible itself is the source of the firsts and second century act of "penance" and "confession to priests". Once you get beyond those ten verses pastor billy bob gave you, you might see it...

Sorry chap....Christ blood is what is required for sin....not penance ...

 

[Guest]

I am not convinced that you do know the "historical details".

Unfortunately for you I typically dont give a rats behind if I convince the opposition or not. It isnt in my agenda...

I realize your agenda has nothing to do with sensible discussion.

....again....yawn...

Thanks for making that clear. Judging on how you treat others who disagree with you, such as Shad on this thread, it seems obvious what your agenda is, belittling others who disagree with you while providing nothing logical to support your case. It's one thing to disagree with someone, another to play your childish bully games with someone you don't even know...

What, are you in sixth grade or something? Grow up.

Now, if you want to actually discuss something without condescending to me with your supposed "mightier than thou" attitude, but light on the knowledge, let me know...

Adios

Youre pretty funny.
You seem to think by shrouding your condescension towards us with a smile on your face and what you seemingly believe is an intellectual argument that somehow we're too ignorant to see it. We arent. Youre probably one of the most condescending people Ive ever met, FD...you just do it in a way that you think youre getting away with it.

Fact: I dont agree with you..deal with it.
Fact: I know the churches history and dont accept YOUR interpretation of the details....again, deal with it.
Fact: YOu werent there any more than I was, so the written records are ALL we have to discern the matter in....not what your church tells us to believe...again, deal with it.

That said, I see no reason for you and I to discuss this particular issue again...do you ?

;)

 

[jasoncran]

I see this is where going to go, and its done.