Biblical understanding

[Tenchi]

As I was reading your post, which I agree with BTW - as to how is coming up -
I thought of the CC before you even mentioned it,
and I thought of the reformed church.

I've been thinking of both a lot lately.
Being a Protestant for over 40 years now, I really disliked how the CC seemed to me to have man-made doctrine.
I've come to study it for about the past 10 years, maybe more, and the more I learn, the more I realize how it really is not different than what we believe.

I appreciate your acknowledgement of (basic) agreement with my observations.

I am married to a former RC adherent, all of whose family, immediate and extended, claim allegiance to the RC faith. They don't believe what I believe at all. I've heard RC advocates point out that there is an often very large divergence between formally-communicated doctrine from the Vatican and the average RC lay-person's understanding of the faith and that one ought not to judge the former by the latter. I don't know about this... I've also got Protestant friends who grew up RC and they, too, describe an enormous difference between what they practiced into their late teens as coattail RC "Christians" and what they came to understand of biblical Christianity as adults. Mere "veneration" of Mary, prescribed by the Vatican, is full-blown worship of her among my wife's family. Mary's essentially a fourth member of the Godhead. Regenerational baptism and trans-substantive communion are also firmly held beliefs by all those I know who are even marginally-dedicated RCs. The idea of the Pope as the "Vicar of Christ" and the pantheon of dead saints to whom RC folk appeal for aid also diverges widely from what I understand of biblical Christianity. The list goes on. What is surprising, however, is, in the few masses I've attended with my wife's family, I have heard a plain, exact, biblical rendering of the Gospel!

In this I'm struck by the very...prosaic observation I heard from Dr. Vernon McGee that dropping a spoonful of muck into a glass of pure, crystal-clear water doesn't purify the muck, it fouls the water. The RC church may preach the Gospel, pure and clear, but doing so is fouled horribly by the muck of traditions, and edicts, and outright contradictions of God's word with which the Gospel is so frequently mixed.

OTOH, I find the reformed church to be different in every way.
And yet, we always mention the CC and not the reformed church, which is exactly what you did above.

I used to be a Calvinist (but of the halfhearted variety). It was never a very satisfying perspective rationally and I kept running into apparent contradictions to Reformed doctrines in God's word. It turns out, there are much better soteriological perspectives out there (Molinism and Provisionism, for example). I agree with you that Reformed Christianity is just as dangerous, just as much a departure from biblical Christianity, as the RC "denomination" is, sharing a similar attitude toward those outside the "fold," as well as an astonishing proliferation of deeply-tangled arguments in favor of Reformed views (See: Occham's Razor). But one has only to follow Reformed thinking carefully and to its end to see the glaring and awful problems it has. For a comprehensive explanation of those problems see:

www.soteriology101.com

Like the RC church, Reformed teachers don't get everything wrong. They get a lot less wrong than the RC church, I think. And about some things, they are spot-on. But where Reformed proponents go wrong, they go VERY wrong.

So a couple of questions:
1. What is the Ecumenical Movement?
2. Do you believe the CC is more heretical than the reformed church?
(If you're reformed, no need to answer no. 2!).

What is the Ecumenical Movement (or, Christian Ecumenism)?

The Ecumenical Movement

Members of the Protestant, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Mormon churches all call themselves Christians—yet they also maintain theologies and practices that diverge in significant ways. Ecumenical organizations such as the World Council of Churches and the National Association of Evangelicals...

pluralism.org

It is a liberal "Christian" effort to bring all Christian "streams" of belief and practice once again under the aegis of the RC church. It promotes unity over Truth. And more and more it is encompassing non-Christian religions within its scope. Yikes. Beware!

 

[GodsGrace]

I appreciate your acknowledgement of (basic) agreement with my observations.

I am married to a former RC adherent, all of whose family, immediate and extended, claim allegiance to the RC faith. They don't believe what I believe at all. I've heard RC advocates point out that there is an often very large divergence between formally-communicated doctrine from the Vatican and the average RC lay-person's understanding of the faith and that one ought not to judge the former by the latter. I don't know about this... I've also got Protestant friends who grew up RC and they, too, describe an enormous difference between what they practiced into their late teens as coattail RC "Christians" and what they came to understand of biblical Christianity as adults. Mere "veneration" of Mary, prescribed by the Vatican, is full-blown worship of her among my wife's family. Mary's essentially a fourth member of the Godhead. Regenerational baptism and trans-substantive communion are also firmly held beliefs by all those I know who are even marginally-dedicated RCs. The idea of the Pope as the "Vicar of Christ" and the pantheon of dead saints to whom RC folk appeal for aid also diverges widely from what I understand of biblical Christianity. The list goes on. What is surprising, however, is, in the few masses I've attended with my wife's family, I have heard a plain, exact, biblical rendering of the Gospel!

In this I'm struck by the very...prosaic observation I heard from Dr. Vernon McGee that dropping a spoonful of muck into a glass of pure, crystal-clear water doesn't purify the muck, it fouls the water. The RC church may preach the Gospel, pure and clear, but doing so is fouled horribly by the muck of traditions, and edicts, and outright contradictions of God's word with which the Gospel is so frequently mixed.



I used to be a Calvinist (but of the halfhearted variety). It was never a very satisfying perspective rationally and I kept running into apparent contradictions to Reformed doctrines in God's word. It turns out, there are much better soteriological perspectives out there (Molinism and Provisionism, for example). I agree with you that Reformed Christianity is just as dangerous, just as much a departure from biblical Christianity, as the RC "denomination" is, sharing a similar attitude toward those outside the "fold," as well as an astonishing proliferation of deeply-tangled arguments in favor of Reformed views (See: Occham's Razor). But one has only to follow Reformed thinking carefully and to its end to see the glaring and awful problems it has. For a comprehensive explanation of those problems see:

www.soteriology101.com

Like the RC church, Reformed teachers don't get everything wrong. They get a lot less wrong than the RC church, I think. And about some things, they are spot-on. But where Reformed proponents go wrong, they go VERY wrong.



What is the Ecumenical Movement (or, Christian Ecumenism)?

The Ecumenical Movement

Members of the Protestant, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Mormon churches all call themselves Christians—yet they also maintain theologies and practices that diverge in significant ways. Ecumenical organizations such as the World Council of Churches and the National Association of Evangelicals...

pluralism.org

It is a liberal "Christian" effort to bring all Christian "streams" of belief and practice once again under the aegis of the RC church. It promotes unity over Truth. And more and more it is encompassing non-Christian religions within its scope. Yikes. Beware!

Great reply.
But 2am here.
Occzms razor....the simplist answer?
Tomorrow

 

[Tenchi]

Occzms razor....the simplist answer?

It's the principle of reasoning that stipulates that explanations ought not to be multiplied unnecessarily. All things being equal, where a simpler explanation suffices, a more complex one shouldn't be developed. For example, I once discussed with a pro-homosexual fellow the Bible's clear and repeated prohibition of homosexuality. He had enormous reams of explanation about why the Bible's explicit and plain condemnation of sex between men was to be understood not to be the condemnation of homosexuality that it obviously was. The number, and incredibly convoluted nature, of his explanations was a testament to the faultiness of his position. At one point, I drew this to his attention by saying, "I will not respond to the many pages of argument you've offered. I'm just not as interested in defending the obvious as you are in denying it." This is an important part of what Occham's Razor addresses: The effort to deny the obvious by way of a multiplicity of convoluted explanations (for which such denial of the obvious facts of a matter an alternative, reasonable and simple explanation is not typically available).

Imagine a man leaping up from his seat at a table in a restaurant, clutching his throat, his face turning purple. He's making strangled noises and goggling wildly at the people around him. A woman exclaims, "He's choking!" Her explanation is simple and fits the evidence for her statement very well. But imagine another patron of the restaurant declaring, "No, he's actually just trying to signal his approval of the dish he's eating. He's probably from a country where such food isn't available. He doesn't speak our language and so he's offering to us a wordless pantomime of his delight in eating his meal. By his actions we can see he's not a very effective communicator, giving us the wrong impression entirely of what he's meaning by his display." And so on. Which explanation would you accept? Why? Occham's Razor gives a general principle in forming an answer.

 

[DiscipleDave]

At 1 Corinthians 15:4, 5 Paul is talking about believers that saw Jesus, not unbelievers. Cephas is another name for Peter you know he was a believer. The 12 apostles which included Peter were believers. Then Paul said Jesus appeared to 500 brethren, that means because Paul calls these 500 brethren they were believers, not unbelievers. So yes DiscipleDave you should believe this scripture at 1 Corinthians 15:4, 5 that proves that all these that Jesus appeared to were believers, not unbelievers

BB1956 said The only ones he appeared to were believers, his apostles and disciples.

This is the way i read it. The only ones He appeared to were believers, 1) His Apostles and 2) Disciples. When you did not put a comma behind the word apostles, it did not read as you intended it to read.

BB1956 said The only ones he appeared to were believers, his apostles, and disciples.

Said that way, i would not have responded, because that is Truth. The way i read your original statement, i believed you were saying that Jesus only appeared to His believers the Apostles and His Disciples. This would not be a correct statement and is what i thought you were saying. Understanding your statement more clearly now, you are indeed correct.

 

[BB1956]

This is the way i read it. The only ones He appeared to were believers, 1) His Apostles and 2) Disciples. When you did not put a comma behind the word apostles, it did not read as you intended it to read.



Said that way, i would not have responded, because that is Truth. The way i read your original statement, i believed you were saying that Jesus only appeared to His believers the Apostles and His Disciples. This would not be a correct statement and is what i thought you were saying. Understanding your statement more clearly now, you are indeed correct.

Anyway the point is, people saying that everyone will literally see Jesus at his second coming or second presence I disagree with. Also those who say Jesus rulership will be on earth, instead of over the earth, I disagree with. Jesus will rule from heaven which is where the Messianic kingdom is, it's a heavenly government. So Jesus will rule over the earth from heaven. Jesus said that the world wouldn't see him again. His apostles and disciples would see him, meaning believers, specifically those believers who will be in heaven with him, ruling over earth with him. The righteous humans, believers, on earth will know they're living in the last days, specifically during the second presence of Jesus Christ because of the composite sign Jesus gave, the righteous humans will not literally see him. The majority of the world of mankind(unbelievers) will not believe they're living in the last days much less believe they're living during Jesus Christ second presence. The world of mankind today will disbelieve just like those who lived in the days of Noah disbelieved. What believers are saying is true today, that we're living in the last days, specifically in the second presence of Jesus Christ, the majority of the world of mankind will disbelieve that until Armageddon happens, then they will know.

 

[GodsGrace]

I appreciate your acknowledgement of (basic) agreement with my observations.

Sorry for delay.

I am married to a former RC adherent, all of whose family, immediate and extended, claim allegiance to the RC faith. They don't believe what I believe at all. I've heard RC advocates point out that there is an often very large divergence between formally-communicated doctrine from the Vatican and the average RC lay-person's understanding of the faith and that one ought not to judge the former by the latter. I don't know about this...

Yes, this is correct.
The CC has done a very poor job of teaching the laity their faith.
It's trying to catch up now but it seems a little too late to me since young people are leaving the CC and all churches, for that matter. Materialism, post-modernism, etc. I guess the new generations are just too darn smart for God.
I guess He's for us dumb folk.

If you want to know anything about the CC you have to check out the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or ask someone you can trust, like on this forum for instance. There's also an apologist I like a lot on YouTube. Found some interesting persons on there the last few days that I spent not feeling too well. His name is Trent Horn, The Council of Trent (nice play on words). Also, Pint with Aquinas. Very intelligent.
I discovered Leighton Flowers some time ago - suggested by a calvinist, now if that ain't ironic !
Also, Beyond the Fundamentals.
Wow. How do you see stuff like this and remain a calvinist, I don't know.

I've also got Protestant friends who grew up RC and they, too, describe an enormous difference between what they practiced into their late teens as coattail RC "Christians" and what they came to understand of biblical Christianity as adults.

This would be me.
My conversion and leaving the CC came at about the same time, over 40 years ago.
Protestantism taught me a lot, but it makes me crazy how we can't seem to agree on everything.
It's bothersome how we understand the bible in different ways.
But I also need to be able to understand everything myself and don't like the Catholic way either.
They just want you to accept the doctrines.
I will say, however, that I find most to be biblical in one way or another.

Mere "veneration" of Mary, prescribed by the Vatican, is full-blown worship of her among my wife's family. Mary's essentially a fourth member of the Godhead.

A 4th member of the Godhead...
I agree with your observation.
In a Catholic church I attend at times here where I live, they've placed all the statutes in the back by the sacristy, with a note that states: "Have you considered praying to Jesus before you pray to your favorite saint?"
Mary is back there, Padre Pio, St. Anthony and I think St. Rocco.

Regenerational baptism and trans-substantive communion are also firmly held beliefs by all those I know who are even marginally-dedicated RCs.

I've been having second thoughts about the above...but this is not the place.
But you're right - at least these two doctrine appear to be known by all.

The idea of the Pope as the "Vicar of Christ" and the pantheon of dead saints to whom RC folk appeal for aid also diverges widely from what I understand of biblical Christianity. The list goes on. What is surprising, however, is, in the few masses I've attended with my wife's family, I have heard a plain, exact, biblical rendering of the Gospel!

Agreed. Both on the role of the Pope, which SHOULD NOT BE the Vicar and praying to the saints.
But the message clearly is that we are to believe in Christ and obey Him.

In this I'm struck by the very...prosaic observation I heard from Dr. Vernon McGee that dropping a spoonful of muck into a glass of pure, crystal-clear water doesn't purify the muck, it fouls the water. The RC church may preach the Gospel, pure and clear, but doing so is fouled horribly by the muck of traditions, and edicts, and outright contradictions of God's word with which the Gospel is so frequently mixed.

I thought you were headed in a different direction...although I do agree with the above.

The RCC wants to purify a person so that they are truly clean.
The Protestant churches want to cover up our dirt by hiding behind Jesus.

I used to be a Calvinist (but of the halfhearted variety). It was never a very satisfying perspective rationally and I kept running into apparent contradictions to Reformed doctrines in God's word. It turns out, there are much better soteriological perspectives out there (Molinism and Provisionism, for example). I agree with you that Reformed Christianity is just as dangerous, just as much a departure from biblical Christianity, as the RC "denomination" is, sharing a similar attitude toward those outside the "fold," as well as an astonishing proliferation of deeply-tangled arguments in favor of Reformed views (See: Occham's Razor). But one has only to follow Reformed thinking carefully and to its end to see the glaring and awful problems it has. For a comprehensive explanation of those problems see:

www.soteriology101.com

Yes, I know about soteriology 101 now. But I've been "studying" calvinism for about 10 years.
As you said, it is not rational and there are too many contradictions with God's word.
So why did YOU see this and not others? Although some do leave the reformed churches, those that remain are staunch believers.

I like and understand Provisionism...
But Molinism strikes me as being too close to calvinism.
What's the difference between God predestinating something
and
creating a situation that makes us choose what HE wants?
I don't understand the difference.

Like the RC church, Reformed teachers don't get everything wrong. They get a lot less wrong than the RC church, I think. And about some things, they are spot-on. But where Reformed proponents go wrong, they go VERY wrong.

I think the reformed are further away from biblical understanding than the CC.

What is the Ecumenical Movement (or, Christian Ecumenism)?

The Ecumenical Movement

Members of the Protestant, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Mormon churches all call themselves Christians—yet they also maintain theologies and practices that diverge in significant ways. Ecumenical organizations such as the World Council of Churches and the National Association of Evangelicals...

pluralism.org

It is a liberal "Christian" effort to bring all Christian "streams" of belief and practice once again under the aegis of the RC church. It promotes unity over Truth. And more and more it is encompassing non-Christian religions within its scope. Yikes. Beware!

Thanks. I agree.

 

[DiscipleDave]

Anyway the point is, people saying that everyone will literally see Jesus at his second coming or second presence I disagree with.

Then your belief does not line up with Scriptures:

Rev 1:7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM, and they also which pierced Him: and ALL kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.

Mat 24:30-31 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they (EVERYONE) shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Also those who say Jesus rulership will be on earth, instead of over the earth, I disagree with.

You would do well to see all the verses which teach Jesus RULES ON EARTH:

Jesus will rule from heaven which is where the Messianic kingdom is, it's a heavenly government.

True, but which Heaven are you referring to, if the First Heaven, which is our atmosphere, you would be correct, but if your referring to the 3rd Heaven where the Father and Jesus are at right now, you are incorrect. They are coming to the Earth to set up His Kingdom ON EARTH

Rev_5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and WE SHALL REIGN ON THE EARTH.

Rev_20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and SHALL REIGN WITH HIM a thousand years. (ON EARTH).

If what you believe contradicts even one verse in Scriptures, then what you believe is WRONG.

i can tell you have not read the entire Bible much, because all of Scriptures teaches about Jesus reigning on Earth

So Jesus will rule over the earth from heaven.

Heaven that is our atmosphere, that is correct. But if your not talking about the Heaven our Atmosphere, then you are incorrect. Heaven is coming to the Earth. Hence the reason we pray "Thy Kingdom COME"

 

[BB1956]

Then your belief does not line up with Scriptures:

Rev 1:7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM, and they also which pierced Him: and ALL kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.

Mat 24:30-31 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they (EVERYONE) shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.



You would do well to see all the verses which teach Jesus RULES ON EARTH:

True, but which Heaven are you referring to, if the First Heaven, which is our atmosphere, you would be correct, but if your referring to the 3rd Heaven where the Father and Jesus are at right now, you are incorrect. They are coming to the Earth to set up His Kingdom ON EARTH

Rev_5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and WE SHALL REIGN ON THE EARTH.

Rev_20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and SHALL REIGN WITH HIM a thousand years. (ON EARTH).

If what you believe contradicts even one verse in Scriptures, then what you believe is WRONG.

i can tell you have not read the entire Bible much, because all of Scriptures teaches about Jesus reigning on Earth



Heaven that is our atmosphere, that is correct. But if your not talking about the Heaven our Atmosphere, then you are incorrect. Heaven is coming to the Earth. Hence the reason we pray "Thy Kingdom COME"

At Revelation 1:7 it's talking about symbolic eyes, not literal eyes. The scripture shows us this when it says that those that pierced him, the Romans would also see him. The Romans, they're long dead. Jesus said at John 14:19 that the world would not see him no more, so after Jesus was resurrected from the dead the only one's Jesus appeared to, who actually saw him were believers, not unbelievers. So when Jesus ascended into heaven at Acts 1:9-11 it was only believers who saw this, not the whole world, no unbeliever saw this happen. So Jesus left or ascended into the sky quietly, without public display, the whole world wasn't even aware this happened, as the scriptures show us only believers were the one's who were aware of this. Jesus will come back in the same manner he left.
Revelation 1:7 is taking us straight to Armageddon. It's the destruction of Armageddon that the world will see going on all around them, so they will know that Jesus has come as a destroyer of the unrighteous. Just like the days of Noah, those who were being destroyed didn't see God then, but they certainly saw the flood happening so they knew it was God destroying them.
At Matthew 24:30, 31 many people believe that because it says, coming in the clouds, that means the whole world will literally see him, but John 14:19 Jesus said the world will see him no more.
So at no time has one ever seen God yet he symbolizes his presence by a cloud. At Mount Sinai at the time God was giving the Law to Israel, a dark cloud covered the mountain. Out of the cloud came lighting and thunder, the blare of a trumpet and a loud voice.(Exodus 19:16-19; 24:15;) YHWH God told Moses that he appeared in this manner in order that he might speak to Moses and that, on hearing it, the people might put faith in Moses as YHWH God's representative.(Exodus 19:9)

YHWH God sent an angel in a cloud as “his own personal messenger” to lead Israel out of Egypt and through the wilderness. (Isaiah 63:9) By means of the angel, YHWH God representatively looked out of the cloud to throw the camp of the Egyptians into confusion. (Exodus 13:2, 22; 14:19, 24-25) Jehovah also used the cloud to baptize them as a nation into Moses, the waters being at the sides of them and the cloud above and behind. Thus they were “baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea.(1 Corinthians 10:2; Numbers 14:14)

When the tabernacle was set up in the wilderness, the cloud resided over it and “YHWH God's glory filled the tabernacle,” so that Moses was unable to enter.(Exodus 40:34, 35; 1Kings 8:10-12; Revelation 15:8) After this the cloud stood over the Most Holy, in which was the ark of the covenant, and the cloud became a pillar of fire at night. Doubtless this cloud was visible from any part of the camp, marking the camp’s center. When it rose, Israel prepared to break camp. (Exodus 40:34-38; Numbers 10:29-32)

Inside the Most Holy, over the ark of the covenant, was a cloud that was very brilliant, the only light to illuminate that compartment. (Leviticus 16:2) When the high priest went into the Most Holy on Atonement Day with the blood of animals, he was symbolically standing in the presence of Jehovah. At other times, when he did not go into the Most Holy but stood before the curtain to present a matter of importance to YHWH God for his answer, he was considered as standing before YHWH God.(Numbers 27:21)
In one instance YHWH God's own voice was heard out of a bright cloud, expressing approval of his only-begotten Son. This was the brilliant cloud overshadowing Jesus and his three apostles Peter, James, and John on the mount of the transfiguration.(Matthew 17:5)

When Jesus ascended into heaven, according to the record, “a cloud caught him up from their vision.” (Acts 1:9) The disciples did not see Jesus riding away on a cloud, but rather, the cloud obscured their vision of him. This helps us to understand Jesus’ words concerning his presence: “They will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and Revelation’s statement: “He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him.” (Luke 21:27; Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7) In past cases clouds represented invisible presence; but observers could “see” the meaning with their mental “eyes.” In this case of seeing Jesus the physical occurrences that are visible would cause the one looking to “see” or realize that Christ is invisibly present.(Matthew 24; Mark 13; Revelation 14:14)
Also we have to take into consideration that when Jesus came to earth, with all the identifications of the Messiah, the Jews selfishly refused to acknowledge him because they demanded as a proof of his Messiahship that he literally fulfill the vision at Daniel 7:13, 14, where the Son of man is shown coming with the clouds of the heavens before the Ancient of Days, YHWH God, to receive his kingdom. They confused his presence in Kingdom power with his first coming. He told them that no such sign would be given them, except the sign of Jonah(Luke 11:29)
So I disagree that anyone on earth will literally see Jesus at his second coming or second presence.

 

[donadams]

This is only what imperfect human beings are saying, not what God is teaching us in scripture. Also these statements were made about 2nd and 3rd centuries. One thing I know is around the end of the 1st century a falling away of the truth began, so by the 2nd and 3rd centuries because of this falling away of the truth they're were probably teaching and practicing many things that were not done during the time of Jesus Christ and his apostles and disciples of the 1st century.

Doctrine of constancy or Unchangeable nature of Christ, His church, and His doctrine:

Christ promised to remain with his church Matt 28:19 acts 1:8

Biblical principle:

Matthew 7:18
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

No bad fruit from the church, no evil.

The church founded by Christ is the ark of salvation:
Only the good fruit of grace and truth unto salvation:

Cannot teach error: matt 5:14 Matt 16:18-19 Matt 28:19 Lk 10:16 Jn 20:21 acts 1:8 acts 2:42 1 Tim 3:15

The universal church must teach, proclaim, define the truths revealed by Christ and condemn all opposing errors!
Thanks

 

[donadams]

Hi donadams

I see pastors and deacons listed as authoritative controls within the body of the 'church'. However, none of them are ever given any authority to change already established Scriptural doctrine. They are just there for control and disciplining authority over the body. In fact, while the RCC holds that Peter is their first leader, it's actually Paul who does more defining and explaining of terms in the Scriptures. God has allowed that Peter gets honorable mention a couple of times, but 75% of the new covenant writings are from Paul. God's proclaimed leader of the Gentiles. I mean Jesus actually told Paul that his life was going to be going around teaching the Gentiles about the things of God.


We follow what the earliest believers said it was to be. They were the ones closest to the Lord. Also, as was done in determining the canon, we want to know 'who' wrote any Scripture. I don't think you understand the purpose of the original canonization of the early writings. It was for the very purpose of keeping 'out' spurious and unnecessary writings.

Absolutely! As a matter of fact, pretty much every single person that is saved on the day of God's judgement will likely have done so without a priest. Only Jesus has the ability to 'save' anyone. He's the one who is writing down the names in his Book of Life. Priests have no power over who or who isn't going to be saved on the day of our Father's judgment. No it doesn't take some priest to put your name in the hat for God's soon coming salvation. You've been duped my friend.

God bless,
Ted

It is impossible to be saved without a priest: Christ is the only savior and he is eternal priest heb 7:17
Thanks

 

[donadams]

Reply to Miamited it’s not biblical 230

You forgot
Call no man father
And Mary’s dogmas

Matt 23:9
Call no man father? Jesus is condemning pride and spiritual pride of the Pharisees?

Or is this absolute?

God calls men father!

Ex 3:6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

Jesus calls men father!

Jn 6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

Mary calls men father!

Lk 1:55 As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

Peter calls men father!

Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.

Acts 3:22 Moses said unto the fathers…

The stephen calls men father!

Acts 7 Stephen quotes the fathers over and over!

The Bible calls men father!

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.


Acts 3:13
The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.


Jn 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

Jesus does not rebuke her for calling men father!


Then there is spiritual fathers!

Spiritual Fathers have care for our souls!

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Jn 21:17 feed my sheep:

Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they care for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

1 Tim 1:2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you

1 Tim 5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father…

1 John 2
My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.

That makes Peter, Paul and John spiritual fathers, pastors of our souls!

Immaculate conception: preserved from all sin by God! Gen 3:15 Lk 1:28 Lk 1:49 rev 12:1
Assumption: rev 12:1
Perpetual virgin Lk 1:34
Mother of God Lk 1:43
Thanks

 

[donadams]

Unity is found in Christ, the Holy Spirit, God the Father and in the Truth they have revealed to us in Scripture.

John 17:23 (NASB)
23 I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

Ephesians 4:1-6 (NASB)
1 Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called,
2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love,
3 being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling;
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

Colossians 3:12-14 (NASB)
12 So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; (See: Romans 13:14)
13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you.
14 Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. (See: Romans 5:5; Galatians 5:22)

Romans 12:5 (NASB)
5 so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Romans 15:5-6 (NASB)
5 Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus,
6 so that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The more biblical Christians are, and the more submitted to the control of the Holy Spirit they are, the more unified they'll be. The Spirit moves those whom he controls to obtain the "tools" necessary to properly understanding divine truth: proper interpretive hermeneutics, principles of good reasoning and an understanding of basic rules of logic, and the capacity to work through complex and sophisticated doctrines with patience and care. The Holy Spirit also imparts a hunger for God's truth to the submitted believer, an enthusiasm for study of God's word, and "the mind of Christ" (1 Corinthians 2:10-16). As he guides believers into the life of Christ, filling them with himself, ordering their thinking and desires (Romans 8:14; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; Galatians 5:25), occupying them more and more with the things of God, the believers in whom he is so working naturally migrate to one another, unifying with one another under his power, and leading, and life, not under denominations, or charismatic leaders, or doctrinal "hobby horses."

When one begins, not with the word of God and the power and illumination of the Holy Spirit, in unifying with fellow believers but insinuates an authoritative human agency into the mix (ie. The Roman Catholic Church/papacy), making it vital to Christian unity, the result will always be division - and/or a tenuous alliance of human factions that is ultimately oriented, not on Christ, but on human power and preferences. This is, essentially, what the religious Ecumenical Movement is.

2 Corinthians 1:21-22 (NASB)
21 Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,
22 who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.

Please explain you’re 30,000 sects all teaching different but erroneous doctrines while Christ built His one true church on Peter, the apostles and their successors that continues in unity of faith and morals until Christ returns
Thanks

 

[donadams]

There was no such thing as original sin the way Augustine described it in his writings in the 400's.
He was WRONG...and the CC has admitted so.
Not by saying he was wrong, but by acknowledging that babies do not go to limbo,,,there's no such place.
It's unfortunate that the CC did not teach the laity correct doctrine and just let them think limbo existed, even though it was never an official position of the CC.

I mean, where do you think they go?
Babies and children are innocent and Jesus said to send the children to Him.
Did He mean on earth but not in heaven??

CCC 1261
1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them.

Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them," allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

Yes we trust them to the mercy of God cos He did not say what happens to them hence “limbo” cos they have no grace without baptism Jn 3:5 and cannot enter heaven but no personal sin so not hell either. Original sin is an effect of the fall of Adam, apart from God and His life of grace, fortunately for us Mary found the favor of God: “our salvation” amen?

New garden of eden!
New Eva!

Eve consented to the fall, and God required Mary to consent to our redemption and salvation both in the annunciation and at the cross!

Mary our hope is the spouse of the Holy Spirit and your assertions are offensive at least to my pius ears if not to the Holy Spirit!

And she consented to be the mother of God Lk 1:43 and she consented to our salvation! Lk 1:38

Two reasons why Mary is the mother of our salvation!

1: Because Jesus Christ is our salvation Lk 2:30 and Mary is His mother!

2: Because she consented to our salvation! Lk 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Lk 1:48 all generations call her blessed
Thanks

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes we trust them to the mercy of God cos He did not say what happens to them hence “limbo” cos they have no grace without baptism Jn 3:5 and cannot enter heaven but no personal sin so not hell either. Original sin is an effect of the fall of Adam, apart from God and His life of grace, fortunately for us Mary found the favor of God: “our salvation” amen?

New garden of eden!
New Eva!

Eve consented to the fall, and God required Mary to consent to our redemption and salvation both in the annunciation and at the cross!

Mary our hope is the spouse of the Holy Spirit and your assertions are offensive at least to my pius ears if not to the Holy Spirit!

And she consented to be the mother of God Lk 1:43 and she consented to our salvation! Lk 1:38

Two reasons why Mary is the mother of our salvation!

1: Because Jesus Christ is our salvation Lk 2:30 and Mary is His mother!

2: Because she consented to our salvation! Lk 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Lk 1:48 all generations call her blessed
Thanks

Don Adams

I was speaking about Augustine, not Mary.
How did Mary get into the discussion?
What did I say that upset you so much?

I disagree with Augustine on ar least 2 topics.
Would you care to discuss?

 

[BB1956]

Then your belief does not line up with Scriptures:

Rev 1:7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM, and they also which pierced Him: and ALL kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.

Mat 24:30-31 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they (EVERYONE) shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.



You would do well to see all the verses which teach Jesus RULES ON EARTH:

True, but which Heaven are you referring to, if the First Heaven, which is our atmosphere, you would be correct, but if your referring to the 3rd Heaven where the Father and Jesus are at right now, you are incorrect. They are coming to the Earth to set up His Kingdom ON EARTH

Rev_5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and WE SHALL REIGN ON THE EARTH.

Rev_20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and SHALL REIGN WITH HIM a thousand years. (ON EARTH).

If what you believe contradicts even one verse in Scriptures, then what you believe is WRONG.

i can tell you have not read the entire Bible much, because all of Scriptures teaches about Jesus reigning on Earth



Heaven that is our atmosphere, that is correct. But if your not talking about the Heaven our Atmosphere, then you are incorrect. Heaven is coming to the Earth. Hence the reason we pray "Thy Kingdom COME"

At Revelation 1:7 it's talking about symbolic eyes, not literal eyes. The scripture shows us this when it says that those that pierced him, the Romans would also see him. Jesus said at John 14:19 that the world would not see him no more, so after Jesus was resurrected from the dead the only one's Jesus appeared to, who actually saw him were believers, not unbelievers. So when Jesus ascended into heaven at Acts 1:9-11 it was only believers who saw this, not the whole world, no unbeliever saw this happen. So Jesus left or ascended into the sky quietly, without public display, the whole world wasn't even aware this happened, as the scriptures show us only believers were the one's who were aware of this. Jesus will come back in the same manner he left.
Revelation 1:7 is taking us straight to Armageddon. It's the destruction of Armageddon that the world will see going on all around them, so they will know that Jesus has come as a destroyer of the unrighteous. Just like the days of Noah, those who were being destroyed didn't see God then, but they certainly saw the flood happening so they knew it was God destroying them.
At Matthew 24:30, 31 many people believe that because it says, coming in the clouds, that means the whole world will literally see him, but John 14:19 Jesus said the world will see him no more. Also no one has ever seen God, yet he symbolizes his presence by a cloud. At Mount Sinai at the time God was giving the Law to Israel, a dark cloud covered the mountain. Out of the cloud came lighting and thunder, the blare of a trumpet and a loud voice.(Exodus 19:16-19; 24:15;) YHWH God told Moses that he appeared in this manner in order that he might speak to Moses and that, on hearing it, the people might put faith in Moses as YHWH God's representative.(Exodus 19:9)

YHWH God sent an angel in a cloud as “his own personal messenger” to lead Israel out of Egypt and through the wilderness. (Isaiah 63:9) By means of the angel, YHWH God representatively looked out of the cloud to throw the camp of the Egyptians into confusion. (Exodus 13:2, 22; 14:19, 24-25) YHWH God also used the cloud to baptize them as a nation into Moses, the waters being at the sides of them and the cloud above and behind. Thus they were “baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea.(1 Corinthians 10:2; Numbers 14:14)

When the tabernacle was set up in the wilderness, the cloud resided over it and “YHWH God's glory filled the tabernacle,” so that Moses was unable to enter.(Exodus 40:34, 35; 1Kings 8:10-12; Revelation 15:8) After this the cloud stood over the Most Holy, in which was the ark of the covenant, and the cloud became a pillar of fire at night. Doubtless this cloud was visible from any part of the camp, marking the camp’s center. When it rose, Israel prepared to break camp. (Exodus 40:34-38; Numbers 10:29-32)

Inside the Most Holy, over the ark of the covenant, was a cloud that was very brilliant, the only light to illuminate that compartment. (Leviticus 16:2) When the high priest went into the Most Holy on Atonement Day with the blood of animals, he was symbolically standing in the presence of YHWH God. At other times, when he did not go into the Most Holy but stood before the curtain to present a matter of importance to YHWH God for his answer, he was considered as standing before YHWH God.(Numbers 27:21)
In one instance YHWH God's own voice was heard out of a bright cloud, expressing approval of his only-begotten Son. This was the brilliant cloud overshadowing Jesus and his three apostles Peter, James, and John on the mount of the transfiguration.(Matthew 17:5)

When Jesus ascended into heaven, according to the record, “a cloud caught him up from their vision.” (Acts 1:9) The disciples did not see Jesus riding away on a cloud, but rather, the cloud obscured their vision of him. This helps us to understand Jesus’ words concerning his presence: “They will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and Revelation’s statement: “He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him.” (Luke 21:27; Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7) In past cases clouds represented invisible presence; but observers could “see” the meaning with their mental “eyes.” In this case the physical occurrences that are visible would cause the one looking to “see” or realize that Christ is invisibly present.(Matthew 24; Mark 13; Revelation 14:14)

 

[BB1956]

Doctrine of constancy or Unchangeable nature of Christ, His church, and His doctrine:

Christ promised to remain with his church Matt 28:19 acts 1:8

Biblical principle:

Matthew 7:18
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

No bad fruit from the church, no evil.

The church founded by Christ is the ark of salvation:
Only the good fruit of grace and truth unto salvation:

Cannot teach error: matt 5:14 Matt 16:18-19 Matt 28:19 Lk 10:16 Jn 20:21 acts 1:8 acts 2:42 1 Tim 3:15

The universal church must teach, proclaim, define the truths revealed by Christ and condemn all opposing errors!
Thanks

People and I will disagree what church is the true church that Jesus Christ is the foundation that it's built upon and doesn't teach error. I agree with scripture, I just don't agree how some people(churches) reason on the scriptures. So Matthew 28:19; Acts 1:8; Matthew 7:18 and all the other scriptures you have mentioned I agree with, but that doesn't necessarily mean I agree with how someone reasons on those scriptures or applies them.
Churches have been saying for centuries that we have souls and that at death these souls separate from our bodies and either go to heaven or a fiery hell, which is false and has always been false. The scriptures say we are souls, not that we have souls. So this destroys the immortality of the soul doctrine that so many believe in and that for many years been taught in their churches.The church saying we are to pray to Saints or to Mary, that's false and has been taught for centuries. So people telling me that the church doesn't teach error, while I certainly agree, most of the time I can see that what people are saying isn't in the scriptures. Does that mean the true church has errored, no. I just don't agree that their church is teaching scripture, so because of that, I will not agree that church is the true church.
The thing I have learned in scripture is it tells us that there will be weeds, meaning imitation Christians. It's reasonable that these weeds would establish there own religious organizations(Churches). Now although these weeds will have Satan as their ruler, that doesn't mean these weeds believe themselves to be weeds or to belong to Satan but instead they honestly believe they belong to Christ. These weeds will do everything that they do thinking they have done a sacred service to the true God. They will even imprison and kill the true servants of the true God, thinking they've done a sacred service to the true God, they will honestly believe the true servants of God are Satan's disciples, just like the Jews thought about Jesus Christ.

 

[DiscipleDave]

At Revelation 1:7 it's talking about symbolic eyes, not literal eyes.

You change Scriptures to line up with your own beliefs, this is not of God to do such things. It plainly and clearly teaches that every eye shall see Him, But because you don't agree with plain Scriptures, because it does not line up with your own belief, you change that verse to mean SPIRITUAL Eyes, something it does NOT say. You do error doing that thing.

The scripture shows us this when it says that those that pierced him, the Romans would also see him.

The Spirits that were in those Romans are alive and well to this very day. They will indeed see Him, when He returns to the Earth to set up His Kingdom.

Jesus said at John 14:19 that the world would not see him no more, so after Jesus was resurrected from the dead the only one's Jesus appeared to, who actually saw him were believers, not unbelievers.

The world will not see the HUMAN MAN Jesus Christ any more. This is Truth.

Jesus will come back in the same manner he left.

True and the whole World will see it, even as Scriptures plainly teaches, but you don't believe plain Scriptures.

i have told you the Truth of all this, it is clear you reject it, in order to keep a hold of your own doctrine.

Here is the Truth of God. When Jesus Returns to the Earth He is bringing with Him the Holy City Jerusalem. Every eye in the entire World will see this happening, mostly on TV/Internet. Every person in the entire World will see this event taking place, then Jesus will go around the planet, collecting all the Sleeping Saints, they will rise first. Then Jesus and those Saints will go around the planet again, collecting the FEW living Saints.
You do error thinking the whole world will not see this event taking place.

However, even though the whole World will see this event, they will say it is a MOTHERSHIP, that has landed, and all nations gather up their armies to attack it, they will all die miserably on that day. Jesus in one fell swoop will have destroyed most every human which desired to KILL instead of Love.

 

[DiscipleDave]

YHWH God sent an angel in a cloud as “his own personal messenger” to lead Israel out of Egypt and through the wilderness. (Isaiah 63:9) By means of the angel, YHWH God representatively looked out of the cloud to throw the camp of the Egyptians into confusion. (Exodus 13:2, 22; 14:19, 24-25) Jehovah also used the cloud to baptize them as a nation into Moses, the waters being at the sides of them and the cloud above and behind. Thus they were “baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea.(1 Corinthians 10:2; Numbers 14:14)

These were UFO's. God only concealed them with clouds so as to humans, not being able to see them.

My video about UFO's, Aliens, Big Foot, etc:

What do you think atheists will call the Holy City Jerusalem coming out of SPACE and landing on the Earth? UFO, and because of the mere size of it, they will most certainly call it the MOTHERSHIP. But the Saints of God will know it is the Holy City Jerusalem, which was foretold to come out of Heaven to the Earth.

 

[DiscipleDave]

In past cases clouds represented invisible presence; but observers could “see” the meaning with their mental “eyes.”

The clouds covered hidden physical UFO's.

i already know, this will cause a great many of you to think i am crazy or nuts. But i will not refuse to tell you the Truths of God, because of the flak i will get from the Nicolaitan Christians of this generation. What i said is the Truth of God, and i have not failed to tell you the Truth of God, and therefore you will not be able to plead ignorance, that you did not know, lo, i have told you. You just reject it.

 

[DiscipleDave]

So I disagree that anyone on earth will literally see Jesus at his second coming or second presence.

What is it to me, if you disagree with the Word of God and what God says?

Woe to this last days generation who do nothing but lean unto their own understanding, something we are told NOT TO DO.

Pro_3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

No, not with this generation. Any person who goes about to interpret the Word of God (as if they even had the authority to do so) are doing NOTHING but leaning unto their own understanding.

Interpretations belong to God NOT TO HUMANS, made a video about that too:

God reveals to whom God reveals, but woe to that person who seeks His Truths via their own interpretations, they will most certainly be led astray from the Truths of God.

God told me this many times:

"If what you believe contradicts even one verse in Scriptures, then what you believe is WRONG."

Not one person would be deceived into believing any false doctrine, if they were to merely believe what God told me many times in Conversations.

But not with this last days generation, when they read a verse that does not line up with what they believe, that is when they try to interpret that verse to mean something they will agree with, or they will try to take that verse to the Hebrew/Greek, or try to make it void by saying "It was said to those IN THOSE DAYS", for this or that reason. Or make it void, or ignore it altogether, Just as long as they don't have to believe what it plainly says, which contradicts their own ideal about what they believe.

True Christians of God, change their beliefs to line up with ALL of Scriptures.
Nicolaitan Christians, change Scriptures to line up with their own beliefs.
One is of God, the other is of the devil.