Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Constantine...not Peter

By NO means is anything written in the word, 'out-dated'. There are times that some things have a separate meaning, but nothing is OVER, yet.

Following Christ through the gospels, or Paul through his epistles is certainly NOT following a 'book'. While I will freely admit that 'the book' is only the beginning of understanding, what it contains are the fundamentals of my belief.

As I already tried to explain, the beginning of the 'true' Church began shortly after Christ's death. Christ stated that upon Peter he would build His Church, but He never stated that it would grow continuously nor that it would 'not be destroyed' from it's original conception.

As OC stated perfectly in his post: 'The temple, (body of, or church), of Christ lives within us, not without". This has been taken by man and turned into a kind of circus of sorts where man created his own church and began to worship 'outside' rather than inside.

The leaders that we were told to emulate ARE DEAD. They died shortly after Christ himself. We have their words that remain to this day, (one good thing that has come from the riches of the Catholic church, even though they refused to allow commoners the possesion of them up until the time of Martin Luther). As the power of the RCC grew, it's influence on EVERYONE under their control brought about the digression of the 'truth' at an astronomical rate.

The love of money is the root of all evil. Wealth, (money), can be many things. Power being the utmost example of such. Power is control, OWNING. It is obvious through the study of history that as the power of the RCC increased, they obviously had to turn their backs on the truth in order to justify their means. Thus, the validity of their 'calling' was thus destroyed.

So, to answer your statements concerning Heb., Those days ARE past as far as the RCC is concerned. There are still Spiritual leaders, but you probably wouldn't recognize any of them any better than myself. They certainly wouldn't be in Huge halls, wearing expensive clothing, and living the 'good life'. They probably resemble something more like John the Baptist, and few, if any, take them seriously at all.

Moses was a man that actually physically communicated WITH God. I personally believe that those times have passed too. Not that God can't communicate with us, but the world and the flesh have had an additional two thousand years since Christ's death to degenerate to the point of the present. Add an additional three thousand years to that, and you will begin to see that as a Spiritual animal, we have experienced an ever downward spiraling spiritual evolution. What our Spiritual forefathers were is now beyond our comprehension. Too much world, and too much flesh in the way.

And you didn't really mean this did you:?


Both Peter and Paul talk about the shepherds they left with us so I don't think you can claim that passage is just talking about the Apostles. Now it would seem that these shepherds will help us to follow Christ and so we should be able to discern who they are. You seem to be admitting that God is defeated in the area of letting us know who his shepherds are today.

Was David Koresh one of these 'leaders'? How about James Jones? Come on guy, you KNOW that that the people that followed them 'thought' that they were 'the ones'! KNEW it in fact, to the point that they were willing die along side these people. Along with our Spiritual degeneration, our Spiritual discernment has degraded also. I wouldn't trust my ability to discern a 'modern leader' for one second. Nor should you for your 'spirits sake'.

And I think you chose to ignore something that I stated previous: I don't judge the hearts of those that have followed the RCC through ignorance. There have certainly been MANY that have followed this institution with nothing in their hearts other than a desire to do God's will. It's the institution itself and the teachings of it's leaders that I disagree with.

The original Church in Rome was built by the apostles that visited there. The problem wasn't the beginning of the Church, but what happened to it once it was mated with the paganism of the leaders that became more powerful once Constantine allowed the open and outright worship of Christ to flourish. Where there's masses there's money and that's what the later leaders desired most.

NO, I do not attempt to sway you to 'my way'. Nothing could be further from the truth. What I offer to you and anyone else that may choose to read these threads is a 'closer' depiction of the 'truth' than that offered by ANY church or religion. Your beliefs are yours, all I can offer is the advice that you be 'true to yourself' in this regard.

Yes, there are obvious myriad 'ways' in which to follow Christ. All one needs is to look around to see the diversity. The problem lies with the difference in 'following Christ' and 'following man' in the name of Christ.

Who now seems to misunderstand history and the present itself? Isn't the Pope closer to God than his followers? Isn't this taught in their churches? Doesn't he have the ability to either grant or deny your salvation according to your acts and beliefs? If this is not following a man-made institution, then I don't know of a better example.

I think you have confused bitterness with sorrow. I have absolutely nothing against ANY MAN except myself and my own flesh. I only offer awareness and alarm to those that don't know any better.

And another point of misunderstanding seems to be you thinking that I am making direct accusations or assumptions about you personally. I don't even know you. What I was hoping was to be able to plant a small seed that you and others may nurture and allow to grow into a better understanding. If not, so be it.

And guy, what I offer is offered out of love. Unfortunately for me, patience and humility are two things that I am still having to struggle with. My life has led to these things and because I realize that our time is limited, sometimes I feel compelled to change the world 'over-night'. Sorry for my weaknesses and I ask for your forgiveness if you feel I have attacked you personally. That's certainly not been my intention.

And the Church which Christ appointed his followers to build still exists, in the hearts of those that choose to follow God instead of man.

Oh, you asked about a civilization that has lasted as long as the Catholic church. The Egyptians had control over a civilization for over three thousand years. But NOTHING of man will last longer than God chooses to allow it. And just as they eventually were stripped of their power, the RCC will loose theirs too.
 
Imagican said:
By NO means is anything written in the word, 'out-dated'. There are times that some things have a separate meaning, but nothing is OVER, yet.

Well you've certainly nullified Heb 13:17. Gee isn't there a verse somewhere that talks about traditions of man nullifying the WOG? This is common among Protestants, especially on this board. If you can't fit it in to your theology you find some way to nullify it so that you don't have to follow it.

Following Christ through the gospels, or Paul through his epistles is certainly NOT following a 'book'. While I will freely admit that 'the book' is only the beginning of understanding, what it contains are the fundamentals of my belief.

Oh, no, don't get me wrong. What it ends up being is men following their wims and things they've been taught along the way and calling them the word of God. That's why I get Solo teaching things that are contrary to Heidi, that are contrary to D46 that are contrary to you and all of you telling me your beliefs are the WOG. Now how can that be. Well, either one or all of you are wrong. I go for the latter myself. Your system is a failed mess of division. Division we are told in scripture is not of God.

As I already tried to explain, the beginning of the 'true' Church began shortly after Christ's death. Christ stated that upon Peter he would build His Church, but He never stated that it would grow continuously nor that it would 'not be destroyed' from it's original conception.

I've not claimed it grew continuously. What does "the gates of hell shall not prevail" mean? I guess that's another one of those scriptures like Heb 13:17 that was for a time but now it cannot be in effect any more or something like that. :o

As OC stated perfectly in his post: 'The temple, (body of, or church), of Christ lives within us, not without". This has been taken by man and turned into a kind of circus of sorts where man created his own church and began to worship 'outside' rather than inside.

I completely agree with what OC said, including the part about the visible Church, the light shining on a hill that you are leaving out. When they say send in the clowns be sure and head for the center ring.

The leaders that we were told to emulate ARE DEAD. They died shortly after Christ himself. We have their words that remain to this day, (one good thing that has come from the riches of the Catholic church, even though they refused to allow commoners the possesion of them up until the time of Martin Luther). As the power of the RCC grew, it's influence on EVERYONE under their control brought about the digression of the 'truth' at an astronomical rate.

Astronomical? My my. So tell me where are the words that John had to say to the Ephesians at the end of 3 John? Are you certain that all the words that Paul said were to be held fast to in 2 Thess 2:15, "Hold fast to the TRADITIONS you have recieved WHETHER BY WORD OF MOUTH or in a letter from us" were written down? Did you know that when England first printed up bibles they had to force people to buy them! THE PEOPLE COULDN'T READ! Now how is that the Church keeping the Bible away from the people. You believe too many wives tales about what happened in history. Do you suppose the Church might have been protecting those precious volumes, many inlaid with that precious gold you claim they were spending on lavish parties. Perhaps the Catholic Church has a little higher esteem for the scripture than some wanna be translator who doesn't know greek from pig latin. Did you know that in order to fund their war chest the Britons burned many of those Bibles that were copied so maticulously by monks over the ages. There was 20 pounds of gold in some of them thar bibles.

The love of money is the root of all evil. Wealth, (money), can be many things. Power being the utmost example of such. Power is control, OWNING. It is obvious through the study of history that as the power of the RCC increased, they obviously had to turn their backs on the truth in order to justify their means. Thus, the validity of their 'calling' was thus destroyed.

God doesn't have the power to protect his doctrine is what you are saying. Catholic Doctrine has been consistent for 2000 years while Protestant doctrine is all over the map. By the way was it you the other day that said that Peter and Paul had their differences. Perhaps you could direct me to scriptures where they identify their theological differences? Thanks.

So, to answer your statements concerning Heb., Those days ARE past as far as the RCC is concerned. There are still Spiritual leaders, but you probably wouldn't recognize any of them any better than myself. They certainly wouldn't be in Huge halls, wearing expensive clothing, and living the 'good life'. They probably resemble something more like John the Baptist, and few, if any, take them seriously at all.

Once again you have nullified the word of God well with a tradition of man.

Moses was a man that actually physically communicated WITH God. I personally believe that those times have passed too. Not that God can't communicate with us, but the world and the flesh have had an additional two thousand years since Christ's death to degenerate to the point of the present. Add an additional three thousand years to that, and you will begin to see that as a Spiritual animal, we have experienced an ever downward spiraling spiritual evolution. What our Spiritual forefathers were is now beyond our comprehension. Too much world, and too much flesh in the way.


Paul apointed leaders in every town and was commanding men to obey and submit to them. It even says in Titus I believe "those who rule well, deserve a greater share of the reward" . I'll look it up if you need it. The fact is that not all of those leaders who were supposed to be followed wrote scripture which you seem to think is the only inspiration men recieve from the Holy Spirit. I do see you never answered my claim about Jesus commanding the people to obey the Pharasees in Matt 23. They didn't write any scripture either. You seem to think that men who sin cannot be worthy of following. Yet that is not God's way. Paul said "the good that I would do I do not, while the EVIL that I would not do I DO.". Wicked man. Do you suppose you would have obeyed him had you seen him doing evil? David had a friend killed for his wife. That was kinda wicked. Yet God still spoke though him. Even the wicked Caiphas whom condemned Jesus to death, God spoke through infallibly the words "it is better that one die for the many". So that men sin and even committ wicked acts does not disqualify them as being used by the Lord to lead us. There were very few of the Popes that did wicked deeds but those who did had little time for corrupting theology and no new doctrine can be attruted to them. I challenge you to find some. Thanks in advance for your efforts.

And you didn't really mean this did you:?

Mean what?

[
i]Both Peter and Paul talk about the shepherds they left with us so I don't think you can claim that passage is just talking about the Apostles. Now it would seem that these shepherds will help us to follow Christ and so we should be able to discern who they are. You seem to be admitting that God is defeated in the area of letting us know who his shepherds are today. [/i]

Was David Koresh one of these 'leaders'? How about James Jones? Come on guy, you KNOW that that the people that followed them 'thought' that they were 'the ones'! KNEW it in fact, to the point that they were willing die along side these people. Along with our Spiritual degeneration, our Spiritual discernment has degraded also. I wouldn't trust my ability to discern a 'modern leader' for one second. Nor should you for your 'spirits sake'.

David Koresh was a Johnny come lately cultist. So was John Calvin and Luther and Zwingli and Joseph Smith. The Catholci Church has offices that go all the way back to Christ. Men only occupy them. We don't follow the men per sey but the office. The one that Christ institued that you say no longer exists. That God did not have the power to protect his Church from the gates of hell.

And I think you chose to ignore something that I stated previous: I don't judge the hearts of those that have followed the RCC through ignorance. There have certainly been MANY that have followed this institution with nothing in their hearts other than a desire to do God's will. It's the institution itself and the teachings of it's leaders that I disagree with.

You've done alot of handwaving and finger pointing but so far have provided little substantial defense for anything and have quoted little scripture. Yet you expect me to follow after your theories. But you claim you cannot discern men of God. How can you discern truth. God says we "must worship in spirit and in truth". It would seem you must think that this is one of those things that is no longer possible either. And so we wallow around in error but depend only on a belief about a man who we think was God but whom we really can't know, because our understanding of the scriptures might be wrong. And the poor devil who cannot read the scriptures and has not the education to understand them. He would be damned to hell it seems. I just see alot of contradiction in your thinking.



The original Church in Rome was built by the apostles that visited there. The problem wasn't the beginning of the Church, but what happened to it once it was mated with the paganism of the leaders that became more powerful once Constantine allowed the open and outright worship of Christ to flourish. Where there's masses there's money and that's what the later leaders desired most.

More theories that you have not substantiated. More handwaving. Show me the proof of your theories. You have none.

NO, I do not attempt to sway you to 'my way'. Nothing could be further from the truth. What I offer to you and anyone else that may choose to read these threads is a 'closer' depiction of the 'truth' than that offered by ANY church or religion. Your beliefs are yours, all I can offer is the advice that you be 'true to yourself' in this regard.

Thanks for the advice.

Yes, there are obvious myriad 'ways' in which to follow Christ. All one needs is to look around to see the diversity. The problem lies with the difference in 'following Christ' and 'following man' in the name of Christ.


Why on earth should we not follow men who follow Christ. This is all over in scripture. Yet your tradition of man causes you to nullfy the word of God concerning such things.

Who now seems to misunderstand history and the present itself? Isn't the Pope closer to God than his followers? Isn't this taught in their churches? Doesn't he have the ability to either grant or deny your salvation according to your acts and beliefs? If this is not following a man-made institution, then I don't know of a better example.

You speak in demonstrated ignorance of Catholicism. It has been said that "there are not 100 men who hate the Catholic Church for what it teaches, but millions who hate it for what they think it teaches." The Pope doesn't sit there and say, your saved and your not. But God gives men authority. Even men who are pagan. Cyrus in Isaiha was said to be God's servant even though he says "you do not know me". As I said earlier, Caiphas spoke the word of God though he had Jesus condemned to death. Peter was to be followed yet we know he denied Christ three times. Jesus says "WHATEVER you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven". Now I certainly wouldn't want to go against whatever Peter bound. We can get in to how the scriptures show that this authority was passed on to others if you like. I doudt you will accept my exegesis but it would be fun.

The pope is not neccessarily the top theologian.


I think you have confused bitterness with sorrow. I have absolutely nothing against ANY MAN except myself and my own flesh. I only offer awareness and alarm to those that don't know any better.

It is sad that scandal in the Church has left you so cold to it. It is sad that you don't understand that the church is a hospital for sinners rather than a hotel for saints. I pray God is merciful to you for following your own whims about how he works.


And another point of misunderstanding seems to be you thinking that I am making direct accusations or assumptions about you personally. I don't even know you. What I was hoping was to be able to plant a small seed that you and others may nurture and allow to grow into a better understanding. If not, so be it.

Well you said about I needed to repent. I do gain better understandings from all who I dialogue with. But those understandings only deepen my Catholic faith. The darkness makes the light easy to see.


And guy, what I offer is offered out of love. Unfortunately for me, patience and humility are two things that I am still having to struggle with. My life has led to these things and because I realize that our time is limited, sometimes I feel compelled to change the world 'over-night'. Sorry for my weaknesses and I ask for your forgiveness if you feel I have attacked you personally. That's certainly not been my intention.

No I don't. Don't sweat it. I'm not nearly offended in any way.


And the Church which Christ appointed his followers to build still exists, in the hearts of those that choose to follow God instead of man.

This I agree with of course.

Oh, you asked about a civilization that has lasted as long as the Catholic church. The Egyptians had control over a civilization for over three thousand years. But NOTHING of man will last longer than God chooses to allow it. And just as they eventually were stripped of their power, the RCC will loose theirs too.

I'll have to check in to that. I doudt they had the same form of governement over that time. Interesting point though.
 
Hi everyone,

I hope you let me in for my two cents worth,

there are plenty of arguments going on in the Christian Forums between Protestants and Catholics.

I don't believe there is much we can influence on either sides.

I am not Catholic but I know Protestants have plenty of heretic abound.

Protestants should strive to improve our own sides instead of trying to convince Catholics. We have so many problems of our own. We are so much away from Jesus' teaching as a whole, both Catholics and Protestants.

How about we strive to improve our own servanthood instead of making it as Catholics and Protestants war.

We are both not doing such a good job as followers of Jesus as a whole..
 
Thess,

My friend, you keep referring to my statements as being Protestant. I am affiliated with NO man-made church or denomination. No, not a Baptist, No, not a methodist, No, not a non-denominational. I was fortunate enough to have been allowed to find the Word through God's continuous efforts to enter my life and change it, without the influence, (with only minor that is), of others trying to lead me 'their way' through the Bible. If I am indeed what you accuse me of, then I am the ULTIMATE Protestant. I protest against any that try and usurp the authority of Christ and/or His Father, my Creator.

If my statements seem to mimic many of the Protestant faith, that is simply because there are many things that are so obviously misrepresented by the RCC that ANY other followers of God can clearly see them. Please don't get me wrong, the Protestants as you so openly refer to all that refuse the Catholic faith, are certainly no less at fault for their failures than the Catholics. I am certainly not so blind as to believe that the Protestants are anything other than an off-shoot of the Catholic faith. Carrying the same baggage and deception.

I tried to explain previous that the Bible is like a huge puzzle. If one tries diligently and honestly, (God knows your intentions), to piece it together, it is possible to see a vague outline of the big picture. This is IMPOSSIBLE to do sentence by sentence. It's a much more intricately woven tapestry. There are central ideas though, and often these can only be understood by taking the work as a whole.

More than once you have made reference to:

"Hold fast to the TRADITIONS you have received WHETHER BY WORD OF MOUTH or in a letter from us" were written down?

And you offer this as if by simply saying it, this somehow 'offers proof' that this is exactly what the RCC has done. I don't believe this though. I think a better quote from the perspective of the RCC would be exactly as was quoted by the apostles. The problem being, I don't believe that the leaders of the RCC were apostles. And, I believe that they would continue this quote even as they changed the original traditions and words as laid down by the apostles.

God doesn't have the power to protect his doctrine is what you are saying. Catholic Doctrine has been consistent for 2000 years while Protestant doctrine is all over the map. By the way was it you the other day that said that Peter and Paul had their differences. Perhaps you could direct me to scriptures where they identify their theological differences? Thanks.

No, that's not what I'm saying. God has much power that he restrains Himself from using for our sakes. God allows freedom of choice for man and that certainly allows man to change his understanding of God's will. The fact that man can choose to stray away from the will of God doesn't nulify His power in the least. And that 2000 year thing that you offer is by no means any proof of anything except your belief. Much has changed in 2000 years, so for you to claim consistency is ridiculous.

I don't know exactly what the differences that Paul and Peter experienced has to do with this discussion, but I thought that eveyone that had read the Bible were aware of the fact that Peter 1. didn't trust Paul in the beginning. 2. Peter didn't even believe that the Salvation offered by Christ was offered to any but his people, (Jews). Peter had much more trouble letting go of the past than Paul did and took much intervention to convince him of the 'truth'.

Am I to take it Thess, that the birthdate of Christ is Dec. 25th? And that the revealing of this date was divine? Or that the 'trinity', unknown to the apostles, was divinely inspired hundreds of years after the death of Christ? Or, that God changed His mind and decided hundreds of years later that it was OK 'now' to call a Spiritual leader, "Father"? Come on man, If this is the case, then we could just throw the Bible out the window and just let our so-called, 'modern day apostles' lead us from here.

And Thess, the RCC doesn't practice the 'gifts' offered at Pentecost. Why? Maybe because the RCC realizes that these gifts were for a time and and a purpose and that time and purpose has ALREADY been fulfilled. Just as we still have the miracles performed by Christ EVERYDAY that we remember them, we still have our Spiritual leaders and the miracles they performed, each and every time we remember and believe them.

I have no doubts that God has his leaders among us at this very moment. The hard part is to find them. We have strayed so far away from God, that it is very easy now days to be led even further astray. The amount of the world which we would have to abandon makes it almost impossible to even see the 'truth' anymore.

This being the case, I am much convinced that I will fare much better by abandoning the teachings of men and follow God through His Word and the Spirit of His Son. I would much rather go down fighting than to be led like a sheep to slaughter. And no, I don't mean literal fighting, I mean that I would much rather be judged by MY actions and beliefs than those that I might learn to follow through others. I can't imagine being asked of my actions, 'Why?', and only having, "That's what they told me", as my defense. There is not one righteous............................no not one.

We are to submit to God's will. This can only be done by accepting His Son as our ultimate sacrifice for sin. Jesus lives RIGHT NOW. He 'knows' those that choose to allow Him into their hearts. He lives there. No amount of church ritual or man's teaching can change this. Neither God or Christ dwell in a temple made by the hands of men. The temple is inside each and every one of us. How we choose to honor that temple is the 'truth'. Our individual 'truth' can be righteous 'truth' or unrighteous, that's up to us. Our number one job is to learn to 'love'. EVERYTHING that God has offered us; Himself and our brothers and sisters. Any church that teaches that this isn't enough is only trying to rob us of our gifts of God and His Son. I see, by the defensive nature of those that defend churches, that they have only fallen for the deceptiveness of satan in that God and Christ ARE NOT ENOUGH. I KNOW better. God and Christ ARE enough for me.

And as stated previous, the Bible is only the beginning of understanding. But it's enough to start with and from there we let the Spirit take over.

My understanding has not been an easy one at times, I must admit. For I would truly like to be able to find the 'body'. I have tried and tried, and each and every time, I am led away from it for the un-truths in which I find there. That leaves me with God, Christ, Spirit, and self. This is nothing more than that which Paul had. I do find individuals along the way. Some that I am able to offer what I have learned and others that are able to offer that which I have yet to learn. But each and every time that I experience the group being led by 'an individual', I find the same failure. A flock of sheep following men instead of God. This certainly isn't for me. I choose to be led by God through the Spirit of Christ living within me. It's enough for me.
 
:o The ignorance of history is no excuse for stupidy.The Catholic Church was founded by Christ and his apostles 2000yrs ago.Not one of the 33000protestant denominations can trace their history past Luther.
 
Right... :roll: The church was started on the day of Pentacost-and it wasn't called the Catholic Church, the Baptist Church, Methodist, Presbyterian, and it sure wasn't the Mormon or SDA's. Paul said...

Galatians 1:8-9 (KJV) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Did he have to say it twice? And, people still "ain't gettin' it!" Likely as not, some never will, sadly.
 
Back
Top