The Catholic Church has helped save the most souls....

[fiat]

I think you hit the nail on the head, OC. What happened to the "gates of hell shall not prevail" in the hundreds of years prior to the Reformation? Why would God allow the Church to become corrupt when the masses knew no other Christianity and would not be able to learn the Faith for themselves?

 

[bibleberean]

The gates of hell didn't prevail against the church because many churches became apostate like the RCC and OC.

There has always been a remnant of believers. The church didn't start with the reformation.

The church started at Pentecost and there have been true believers from that time to the present.


Historical Statements
Concerning Baptists and their Origins
Edited by B. Myron Cedarholm

http://members.citynet.net/morton/baptist.htm

Although we at Morton Publications are not ones to "beat a denominational drum," we are Independent Baptists by choice and believe fundamental Baptist doctrines (not necessarily the name "Baptist) can be directly traced to the time of Christ as the following quotes testify.

Historians testify that local churches; which hold the doctrines, beliefs, and practices of today's Bible-believing, separatist Baptists; have had continuous existence since the days of Christ. This cannot be said of any other church, churches, or religious organization. Here are a few statements by historians and religious leaders (only one of them a Baptist) regarding the history of the Baptists:

Sir Isaac Newton said,

"The Baptists are the only body of known Christians that have never symbolized with Rome."

SINCE THE APOSTLES

Ypeij and Dermout, eminent historians of the Dutch Reformed Church said,

"The Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community that has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society has preserved pure the doctrine of the Gospel through all the ages."

Alexander Campbell, founder of the Campbellites (Christian Church or Disciples of Christ) who rigorously opposed Baptists during the 19th century, wrote,

"The sentiments of Baptists and their practice of baptism from the apostolic age to the present, have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced."

Robert Barclay, a Quaker historian, says of Baptists,

"We shall afterward show that the rise of the Anabaptists took place prior to the Reformation of the Church of England, and there are also reasons for believing that on the continent of Europe, small hidden Christian societies, who have held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have existed from the times of the apostles. In the sense of the direct transmission of divine truth, and the true nature of spiritual religion, it seems probable that these churches have a lineage or succession more ancient than that of the Roman Church."

John Clark Ridpath, doubtlessly the greatest historian the world has ever produced and a Methodist by denomination, said,

"I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back as 100 A.D., although without doubt there were Baptist churches then, as all Christians were then Baptists."

Mosheim, an outstanding Lutheran historian, said,

"Before the rise of Luther and Calvin, there lay secreted in almost all the countries of Europe, persons who adhered tenaciously to the principles of the modem Dutch Baptists... the origin of Baptists is lost in the remote depths of antiquity... the first century was a history of Baptists."

Zwingli, a Presbyterian co-laborer with John Calvin, said,

"The institution of the Anabaptists is no novelty, but for 1300 years has caused great trouble in the church." Catholic Cardinal Hosius, President of the Council of Trent from 1545 to 1564, said, "Were it not for the fact that the Baptists have been grievously tormented and cut off with the knife during the past 1200 years, they would swarm greater than all the reformers If the truth of religion were to be judged by the readiness and boldness of which a man or any sect shows in suffering, then the opinions and persuasions of no sect can be truer and surer than those of the Anabaptist, since there have been none for the 1200 years past that have been more generally punished or that have been more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and have offered themselves to the most cruel sort of punishment than these people:'

"Crossing the Centuries" edited by William C. King, says,

"Of the Baptists it may be said that they are not reformers. These people. comprising bodies of Christian believers known under various names in different countries, are entirely distinct and independent of the Roman and Greek churches, and have an unbroken continuity of existence from apostolic days down through the centuries Throughout this long perio they were bitterly persecuted for heresy, driven from country to country. disfranchised, deprived of their property, imprisoned, tortured and slain by the thousands; and yet they swerved not from their New Testament faith, doctrine, and adherence."

Spurgeon said,

"History has hitherto been written by our enemies, who never would have kept a single fact about us upon the record if they could have helped it, and yet it leaks out every now and then that certain poor people called Anabaptists (Anabaptist was the name given to Baptists before the 16th century. "Ana" means "again," but the entire name, Anabaptist, was applied to those who believed and practiced what Bible-believing, separatist Baptists do today) were brought up for condemnation.

From the days of Henry VIII to those of Elizabeth, we hear of certain unhappy heretics who were hated of all men for the truth's sake that was in them. We read of poor men and women, with their garments cut short, turned out into the fields to perish in the cold, and anon of others who were burnt at Newington for the crime of Anabaptism.

Long before your Protestants were known of, those horrible Anabaptists, as they were unjustly called, were protesting for the 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.'

No sooner did the visible church begin to depart from the Gospel than these men arose to keep fast by the good old way The priests and monks wished for peace and slumber, but there was always a Baptist or a Lollard tickling men's ears with Holy Scriptures, and calling their attention to the errors of the times. They were a poor persecuted tribe. The halter was thought to be too good for them.

At times, ill-written history would have us think that they died out, so well had the wolf done his work on the sheep. Yet here we are, blessed and multiplied, and Newington sees other scenes from Sunday to Sunday As I think of the multitudes of your numbers and efforts, I can only say in wonder, 'What a growth!' As I think of the multitudes of our brethren in America, I can only say, 'What hath God wrought!' Our history forbids discouragements."

 

[bibleberean]

Long before Martin Luther the Papists were persecuting anyone who did not agree with their doctrines.

The Papal church evolved slowly and her heresies increased rapidly as well as the whore's lust for power and control...

Excerpt from

FOX'S BOOK OF MARTYRS

" By the year of Christ 1140, the number of the reformed was very great, and the probability of its increasing alarmed the pope, who wrote to several princes to banish them from their dominions, and employed many learned men to write against their doctrines.

In A.D. 1147, because of Henry of Toulouse, deemed their most eminent preacher, they were called Henericians; and as they would not admit of any proofs relative to religion, but what could be deduced from the Scriptures themselves, the popish party gave them the name of apostolics. At length, Peter Waldo, or Valdo, a native of Lyons, eminent for his piety and learning, became a strenuous opposer of popery; and from him the reformed, at that time, received the appellation of Waldenses or Waldoys.

Pope Alexander III being informed by the bishop of Lyons of these transactions, excommunicated Waldo and his adherents, and commanded the bishop to exterminate them, if possible, from the face of the earth; hence began the papal persecutions against the Waldenses.

The proceedings of Waldo and the reformed, occasioned the first rise of the inquisitors; for Pope Innocent III authorized certain monks as inquisitors, to inquire for, and deliver over, the reformed to the secular power. The process was short, as an accusation was deemed adequate to guilt, and a candid trial was never granted to the accused."

 

[fiat]

I'm confused by your post bibleberean.

The term anabaptist (which means in Greek "rebaptiser") was used by the Early Church to describe any sect which practiced re-baptism such as the Donatists of St. Augustine's time. Donatism was denounced as heresy. Except for the practice of re-baptism, they share next to nothing in common with baptists or even anabaptists (they did not say infant baptism was wrong, re-baptism was only for repentant apostates from the persecutions, and baptism was not merely a symbol).

The 16th century anabaptists have their direct descendants in the Mennonite and Amish denominations who do not claim apostolic succession, but who practice baptism by affusion (rather than Baptist immersion) and who preach faith and works (rather than sola fide). The Baptists, founded in 1609, share very little in common with the anabaptists.
I don't see any connection between the between anabaptists and baptists, or baptists and other "re-baptising" sects in the early days of the Church.
Whoa.

Major topic change! Sorry! Maybe a new thread should be opened for this?

 

[Orthodox Christian]

The gates of hell didn't prevail against the church because many churches became apostate like the RCC and OC.

There has always been a remnant of believers. The church didn't start with the reformation.

The church started at Pentecost and there have been true believers from that time to the present.

And thus, we have an answer to my first question:
Few Christians existed

There appears to be no answer to my second question.

Historical Statements
Concerning Baptists and their Origins
Edited by B. Myron Cedarholm

http://members.citynet.net/morton/baptist.htm

Although we at Morton Publications are not ones to "beat a denominational drum," we are Independent Baptists by choice and believe fundamental Baptist doctrines (not necessarily the name "Baptist) can be directly traced to the time of Christ as the following quotes testify.

Historians testify that local churches; which hold the doctrines, beliefs, and practices of today's Bible-believing, separatist Baptists; have had continuous existence since the days of Christ. This cannot be said of any other church, churches, or religious organization. Here are a few statements by historians and religious leaders (only one of them a Baptist) regarding the history of the Baptists:

This is essentially known as Landmarkism, a Successionist approach which has been roundly discredited from within- for example,
"Baptist Successionism: : A Crucial Question in Baptist History by James Edward McGoldrick."

This is a study by a Baptist scholar which thoroughly refutes the entire thesis of the trail of blood. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were no low church "baptistic" Christian sects traceable in an unbroken line to Apostolic times, that all sects named by Carroll were historically discontinuous & unrelated to each other, that these same sects were all heretical by baptist/evangelical standards, and that all baptist sects are clearly protestant deriving their theology & practices from the 16th Century Protestant Revolt against the Church. This book makes it clear that the Landmarkist and Successsionist claims of some low Church sects are unfounded and indefensible.

This book is available at Amazon. Here is another review from the Amazon book site:

This book to me was a breath of fresh air. While I am not a Baptist (but at one time was affiliated with a non-landmark Baptist Church), my interest in this book was not so much for the purpose of refuting landmarkism, but to examine the various Christian or quasi-Christian bodies deemed heretical by the Catholic Church, and heralded as heroes of "true christianity" by Foxe's book of Martyrs, Dave Hunt, and the others who, denying that the Catholic Church is a Christian body, have to stay faithful to the words of Christ in Matthew 16:18 (and in doing so, label gross heresies and anti-Christian groups as "true Christians", calling that which is evil good).
The scholarship is excellent, as McGoldrick is careful to use original sources when possible, and when not, he honestly addresses the credibility of his secondary sources and is careful to extensively footnote everything.

For this purpose I am greatly indebted, as the book is useful to this end as well. The fact that McGoldrick misunderstands Catholic soteriology can be forgiven, as that was not the scope of this work. I highly recommend this to every honest Christian, regardless of denominational affiliation.

Yes, and this is the essential point: In order to prove an unbroken succession of "remnant," Landmarkists have laid claim to every disconnected set of heretics along the way. take for example

Sir Isaac Newton said,

"The Baptists are the only body of known Christians that have never symbolized with Rome."

Are you at all aware, BB, of Newton's views on the Trinity?
I'll give you a hint: Muslim polemicists quote him against the Trinity

http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/newton1.html

No sooner did the visible church begin to depart from the Gospel than these men arose to keep fast by the good old way The priests and monks wished for peace and slumber, but there was always a Baptist or a Lollard tickling men's ears

And so it continues to this day: baseless claims of apostasy coupled with preachers tickling men's ears.

And this is what they preach:

Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation [are] holy, every one of them, and the LORD [is] among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

and

Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

There has always been a rebellion, that is for certain: it started in the heavens and continues unabated in pulpits.

 

[cj]

Too bad it EXPOSES the idiocy of the Fundamentalist attitude towards God.

No Soma, the idiocy belongs to you.


In love,
cj

No personal attacks...

Formal warning...

It was not meant to be one.

Soma suggested that the Fundamentalist attitude towards God is ridiculous.

I pointed out that what Soma said was what is ridiculous.



And this is why.....

Soma, as many here, is missing the mark regarding religiousity; Soma is in fact pulling examples out of the same pea pod and calling these examples different.

In a sense they are, but in God's eyes they are not.


In love,
cj

 

[cj]

ok, to get this back on track

It was never off track oh perceptive one.

1. If RCC/EOC are both 'apostate,' then few, if any Christians, existed between the 2nd century and the 16th

You need to read your bible OC, the parts that tell us very clearly that men can be saved and yet far away from God.

2. Why would God preserve the bible, yet allow millions of innocent people to be "deceived" by the only Christianity they knew? IE, why did God not preserve His people and His Church?

This is the shameful thought of man....... "Why?"

Instead, God declares "In spite of....."

God has continually preserved His Church, but in the principle that is revealed to us in the OT, where Elijah thinking that he was all there was for God, was quickly put in his place when God told him "No, no,.... I have reserved 7,000 more for myself in Jerusalem. 7,000 who have not bowed their knee to Romanism/Orthodoxy/Balaam, and kissed its ring."

What OC has suggested expose what our Lord referred to as the blindness of the Laodiceans.

3. If one concludes that many were 'saved' in those days, this leads one to ask why a Reformation would even be required (the irrelevancy of which TM spoke of).

The Reformation was the initiation of the outward manifestation of the Church of God, after hundreds of years of remaining hidden.

John 17 tells us that the world must see the Church, and this is being brought into a reality in these last days.

In love,
cj

 

[cj]

I think you hit the nail on the head, OC. What happened to the "gates of hell shall not prevail" in the hundreds of years prior to the Reformation? Why would God allow the Church to become corrupt when the masses knew no other Christianity and would not be able to learn the Faith for themselves?

Why did Peter still fail even after being filled with the Spirit?



Fiat, initial salvation is a gift, but God requires men to take this gift and work a profit out of it for themselves and for Him.

Unfortunately, many believers left Paul's ministry, which was the onlt God-given/ordained/annointed completing ministry, and in doing so they suffered loss. No they did not lose their salvation, but they received no more life, and as a result they became weak and then even lost what little life they had.

Christians don't need religion, Christians need Paul's ministry.

In love,
cj

 

[cj]

There has always been a rebellion, that is for certain: it started in the heavens and continues unabated in pulpits.

For sure this is true.

And as surely we can know that the highest examples of this is found in the synagogues of the Romanist and Orthodox apostate institutions.


In love,
cj

 

[Orthodox Christian]

1. If RCC/EOC are both 'apostate,' then few, if any Christians, existed between the 2nd century and the 16th

You need to read your bible OC, the parts that tell us very clearly that men can be saved and yet far away from God.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Being "saved" is precisely synonymous with coming into right relationship with God.


Moreover, as we shall see below, you arbitraily and capriciously incorporate many who are not part of the "remnant" into the category of the saved- and then go on to describe a remnant whose counterparts among the non-remnant were anything but saved.

Sloppy agape, sloppy examples.

2. Why would God preserve the bible, yet allow millions of innocent people to be "deceived" by the only Christianity they knew? IE, why did God not preserve His people and His Church?

This is the shameful thought of man....... "Why?"

Instead, God declares "In spite of....."

God has continually preserved His Church, but in the principle that is revealed to us in the OT, where Elijah thinking that he was all there was for God, was quickly put in his place when God told him "No, no,.... I have reserved 7,000 more for myself in Jerusalem. 7,000 who have not bowed their knee to Romanism/Orthodoxy/Balaam, and kissed its ring."

I don't want silly equivocation, I want an answer to my question: Why? I asked it not of God, but of Bibleberean.

What OC has suggested expose what our Lord referred to as the blindness of the Laodiceans.

The Laodiceans were warned about their complacency. They did repent, briefly, then lapsed into lukewarmness. Laodicea not only ceased to exist as a Church- the whole city disappeared from the map around the early 4th century.

Yet we are to see a comparison between Rome, the East, and Laodicea?
Sorry, the glove don't fit, you must acquit.

3. If one concludes that many were 'saved' in those days, this leads one to ask why a Reformation would even be required (the irrelevancy of which TM spoke of).

The Reformation was the initiation of the outward manifestation of the Church of God, after hundreds of years of remaining hidden.

I guess this inner manifestation was just bustin' at the seams to manifest itself in war (Zwingli), killings (Calvin), wars (Switzerland), anti-Semitism (Luther), purging the New Testament of pesky extraneous literature like James, Jude, Revelation, Hebrews, and those silly deuterocanonicals(Luther again), peasant revolts (Germany), with burnings (New England), etc,etc,etc.

John 17 tells us that the world must see the Church, and this is being brought into a reality in these last days.

In love,
cj

How so? The unity of God is expressed in the factiousness of our time? In the ubiquitous attacks upon those who have remained in unity?

In those days [there was] no king in Israel: every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.

 

[Soma-Sight]

cj,

No offense if you are a Bilical Literalist - Fundamentalist!

That is your prerogative and your God given right to choose HOW to believe in the Divine!

I just happen to see much Godly wisdom from those Monks and many Catholics in general!

OC put it best with his three more "condensed" inquiries on this topic!

There is a different logical conclusion.

That for over 1200 years (~300 until the Reformation) that no one was saved. Very, very, very few could read, so it would have been essentially impossible for them to have a "protestant" relationship outside of what the Church told them. Communion and attendance at a service in a language you couldn't understand was enough for them, as far as they were concerned.

Thinker man,

This is a grim possibility that any sane person could never accept unless you are of the very Fundamentalist attitude!

Good point! :angel:

 

[cj]

cj,

No offense if you are a Bilical Literalist - Fundamentalist!

No offense taken Soma, I understand the folly you abide in, and the issue of this folly.

That is your prerogative and your God given right to choose HOW to believe in the Divine!

See, right here in your above statement you show us that you have little understanding about the matter of belief in God.

Men have no "God-given right to choose HOW to believe in the Divine", as you put it. The bible is very clear on this, there is one way and one way only.

I just happen to see much Godly wisdom from those Monks and many Catholics in general!

No, the truth is, you see much of what you have erroneously concluded as God's wisdom. But your words show us that you don't know God and thus invalidate any claim of yours to being able to see His wisdom expressed in others.

In love,
cj

 

[fiat]

Why did Peter still fail even after being filled with the Spirit?



Fiat, initial salvation is a gift, but God requires men to take this gift and work a profit out of it for themselves and for Him.

Unfortunately, many believers left Paul's ministry, which was the onlt God-given/ordained/annointed completing ministry, and in doing so they suffered loss. No they did not lose their salvation, but they received no more life, and as a result they became weak and then even lost what little life they had.

Christians don't need religion, Christians need Paul's ministry.

Yes, Peter fell. I fall daily. We are talking, however, of the pure and spotless bride of Christ. The Church, called by the Scriptures the "pillar and bulwark of truth." A Church that is the visible, tangible Body of Christ as we read in the Book of Acts, "Saul, Saul why do you persecute ME?" Not my people, but ME...Christ! Christ prayed that we be ONE as He and the Father are one. In God there is no division. Did this unity which Christ prayed for, and the "foundation of Truth" preached by the Scriptures simply crumble only to be pieced back together again by the reformers? It doesn't stand to reason. I as a member of the Church am a sinner, as was Peter, but the Church herself is Christ's bride with holiness as her attribute which she cannot lose.

 

[cj]

That makes no sense whatsoever. Being "saved" is precisely synonymous with coming into right relationship with God.

Your vision is very short OC,.... a result of being under poor ministry.

Complete organic salavation (the transformation and conformation of the heart/soul) is a life-long process, but the initial gift of salvation is instant, taking place the moment a person believes according to the manner laid out in God's word. This initial aspect takes place when a person's spirit is regenerated upon their believing. At this point, a person receives God as life, and thus the person becomes born-again of the Spirit, born-again of God's divine life. But this is only in the spirit of a man, and not the rest of this man's being. Hence, we have the matter of the working out of our salvation, which is the spreading of this divine life into the rest of our being.

Once a person has believed this person is eternally saved, for there is nothing that can defeat the divine life (the Seed) which has been placed in and become one with this person's spirit.

But there is more work to be done, the work of God in transforming and conforming (renewing) the heart/soul of this person, and this work includes the willing cooporation of men. It is in this aspect of our complete salvation work that a person can be outside of God's will (far away from Him) and yet still be in a right relationship with Him as a result of what the Son accomplished.

God sees the Son, and any who have believed into the Son are eternally covered by what the Son has accomplished. But the Son must now be worked into the very being of each believer, and in doing this gain His expression through each believer.

Men can most certainly be eternally saved and yet be far away from God in their being and living.

Moreover, as we shall see below, you arbitraily and capriciously incorporate many who are not part of the "remnant" into the category of the saved- and then go on to describe a remnant whose counterparts among the non-remnant were anything but saved.

Sloppy agape, sloppy examples.

OC, lets take a look at your error,.....

I don't want silly equivocation, I want an answer to my question: Why? I asked it not of God, but of Bibleberean.

Are you determined to remain blind OC?

God most certainly preserved His Church regardless of what was taking place.

Tell me, did God not preserve you even as you were still only a sinful, fallen man?

It is to your utter shame OC, that you expose yourself as continuing to look to the outward for God's work, rather than the inward, which is where His work starts.

The call to"Come out" tells us that those called were once in that out of which they are being called.

And even on a personal level we can find this principle at work, for hasn't God left you with the old fallen man and his ways for a time?

Tell me, doesn't G the bible tell us that God brings good out of that which was meant for evil.

Why is it so hard for you to grasp this truth? Or do you not desire to possess the truth of God?

The Laodiceans were warned about their complacency. They did repent, briefly, then lapsed into lukewarmness. Laodicea not only ceased to exist as a Church- the whole city disappeared from the map around the early 4th century.

And yet, God in His wisdom thought it good and proper to include our Lord's speaking to them in His final written word to us.

But I understand if God's word is used as a history book, why you would present the foolish speaking above.

The fact is OC, the spiritual principle that we find spoken of in our Lord's epistle to the Laodiceans is still valid today.

Yet we are to see a comparison between Rome, the East, and Laodicea?

Sorry, the glove don't fit, you must acquit.

Unfortunately for the institution that you serve (and those like it) the environment of judgement will not be human, but rather divine.

And there won't be an acquital.

OC, the eternal lesson that is laid out by our Lord in His epistle to the Church in Laodicea is as relevant today as it was the day John wrote it. And what is found in the religious Roman and Orthodox apostate institutions, and the daughters of these two is the same situation as that found in Laodicea. Actually, its even worse.

I guess this inner manifestation was just bustin' at the seams to manifest itself in war (Zwingli), killings (Calvin), wars (Switzerland), anti-Semitism (Luther), purging the New Testament of pesky extraneous literature like James, Jude, Revelation, Hebrews, and those silly deuterocanonicals(Luther again), peasant revolts (Germany), with burnings (New England), etc,etc,etc.

You're funny,...... how you love to turn to men OC.

OC, the Lord Himself told us that we speak death with "..... the tongue no one among men is able to tame; it is a restless evil, full of deadly poison."

Only perfection will manifest perfection OC, but by one action alone, we can know that the situation was changing,...... God's word became available to all.

You still sin today OC, and yet declare at the top of your lungs that you are for God on this earth.

How much more difficult would this have been for you if you were not able to read the words of the bible for yourself.

Read again what I wrote,..... "The Reformation was the initiation of the outward manifestation of the Church of God, after hundreds of years of remaining hidden."

John 17 tells us that the world must see the Church, and this is being brought into a reality in these last days.

In love,
cj

How so? The unity of God is expressed in the factiousness of our time? In the ubiquitous attacks upon those who have remained in unity?[/quote]

You speak out of both sides of your mouth above and have no clue as to having done so.

OC, you don't know what the oneness of God is, much less know what it looks like. Hence your meaningless statement above.

For sure you and others like you have formed a common union upon your beliefs in the religion of the Orthodox institution, as have the Romanist, the Lutherens, the Baptists, the Pentecostals, and on and on. All that's left now is for some to argue length of standing or find justification in belief systems.

What a fraud is being perpetuated. The common, vain fraud of men.

Your "unity" is nothing to God. The way of man is nothing to God. And yet you invoke it as some sort of validation.



What makes us one with God OC, the doctrines/forms/tradition of men or the life He has placed in our regenerated spirit?

Find the answer and you will find the only ground of oneness God recognizes.

In those days [there was] no king in Israel: every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.

Oh, don't be fooled by your pride OC, today there is most certainly a King, the King of Kings. You just don't seem to know this.


In love,
cj

 

[cj]

Why did Peter still fail even after being filled with the Spirit?



Fiat, initial salvation is a gift, but God requires men to take this gift and work a profit out of it for themselves and for Him.

Unfortunately, many believers left Paul's ministry, which was the onlt God-given/ordained/annointed completing ministry, and in doing so they suffered loss. No they did not lose their salvation, but they received no more life, and as a result they became weak and then even lost what little life they had.

Christians don't need religion, Christians need Paul's ministry.

Yes, Peter fell. I fall daily. We are talking, however, of the pure and spotless bride of Christ.

Which I believe you have little understanding of.

Tell me Fiat, if you were betrothed to a female, if you were given to marrying a certain female, what would keep you from marrying her?

The Church, called by the Scriptures the "pillar and bulwark of truth." A Church that is the visible, tangible Body of Christ as we read in the Book of Acts, "Saul, Saul why do you persecute ME?" Not my people, but ME...Christ!

So Christ is marrying Himself then?

Christ prayed that we be ONE as He and the Father are one. In God there is no division. Did this unity which Christ prayed for, and the "foundation of Truth" preached by the Scriptures simply crumble only to be pieced back together again by the reformers?

See, you are falling into the same error as OC.

Fiat, Christ Himself declared....... "I will build my Church."

Not men Fiat, but Christ is who builds His Church.

And by the very fact that this age is not yet ended, we can know that the building work is still going on.

What took place during the Reformation was simply a part of the one work.

It doesn't stand to reason. I as a member of the Church am a sinner, as was Peter, but the Church herself is Christ's bride with holiness as her attribute which she cannot lose.

You are not clear saint, and this is why you are having a hard time with reason.

As a born-again believer, Christ entered you as life, regenerating you spirit instantly. But the rest of your being is in a process of transformation, and this takes time.

The Bridegroom is not coming back for a immature (uncompleted) bride, but for a mature bride, a bride that matches His own maturity. Just as Eve was the perfect counterpart of Adam, having come out of Adam.

In love,
cj

 

[Orthodox Christian]

That makes no sense whatsoever. Being "saved" is precisely synonymous with coming into right relationship with God.

Your vision is very short OC,.... a result of being under poor ministry.

"Under" ministry- maybe in your view those who minister are "over"- but the very word ministry has the notion of undergirding, not overbearing.

I would humbly advise you keep that in mind.

Complete organic salavation (the transformation and conformation of the heart/soul) is a life-long process, but the initial gift of salvation is instant, taking place the moment a person believes according to the manner laid out in God's word. This initial aspect takes place when a person's spirit is regenerated upon their believing. At this point, a person receives God as life, and thus the person becomes born-again of the Spirit, born-again of God's divine life. But this is only in the spirit of a man, and not the rest of this man's being. Hence, we have the matter of the working out of our salvation, which is the spreading of this divine life into the rest of our being.

Once a person has believed this person is eternally saved, for there is nothing that can defeat the divine life (the Seed) which has been placed in and become one with this person's spirit.

But there is more work to be done, the work of God in transforming and conforming (renewing) the heart/soul of this person, and this work includes the willing cooporation of men. It is in this aspect of our complete salvation work that a person can be outside of God's will (far away from Him) and yet still be in a right relationship with Him as a result of what the Son accomplished.

God sees the Son, and any who have believed into the Son are eternally covered by what the Son has accomplished. But the Son must now be worked into the very being of each believer, and in doing this gain His expression through each believer.

Men can most certainly be eternally saved and yet be far away from God in their being and living.

So sez you.
Matthew 15:1-12
Revelation 21:6-8
Matthew 10:38
2 Thessalonians 1:1-5
2 Timothy 2:12
Luke 9:62
Salvation is in the name of Christ, a concept you think means "say Jesus like a password and you're in."

Sorry, not so.

You preach a truncated gospel, which is worse than a completely falsified gospel.

God most certainly preserved His Church regardless of what was taking place.

Tell me, did God not preserve you even as you were still only a sinful, fallen man?

He looks after drunks and fools, for His mercy is forever.

God's mercy towards the lost is not synonymous with His preservation of His Church.

It is to your utter shame OC, that you expose yourself as continuing to look to the outward for God's work, rather than the inward, which is where His work starts.

On the contrary, this is just word games on your part. The Orthodox place a greater emphasis on what is happening on the inside than any other tradition or non-tradition tradition. We deal with the whole person- while you typically spiritualize everything. Today you're taking the wholistic posture, which strikes me as funny in that, either you don't notice your contradictory statements, or don't expect me to notice.

The Laodiceans were warned about their complacency. They did repent, briefly, then lapsed into lukewarmness. Laodicea not only ceased to exist as a Church- the whole city disappeared from the map around the early 4th century.

And yet, God in His wisdom thought it good and proper to include our Lord's speaking to them in His final written word to us.

But I understand if God's word is used as a history book, why you would present the foolish speaking above.

I understand that, if one uses John's Apocalypse as a crystal ball, they would be disinclined to study the historical context.

Case in point: you make a comparison between Rome, The East and Laodicea. I point out that God's final judgement came as promised upon Laodicea, and has not upon either Rome or Constantinople- ergo, analogy is broke. Rather than acknowledge the impotence of your analogy, you attempt to make me appear less spiritual just because I have taken some time to get to know what I'm talking about.

Broke.

I guess this inner manifestation was just bustin' at the seams to manifest itself in war (Zwingli), killings (Calvin), wars (Switzerland), anti-Semitism (Luther), purging the New Testament of pesky extraneous literature like James, Jude, Revelation, Hebrews, and those silly deuterocanonicals(Luther again), peasant revolts (Germany), with burnings (New England), etc,etc,etc.

You're funny,...... how you love to turn to men OC.

My alternative is what...to speak of Ninja Turtles?

How I love to point out the factual gaps in your peculiar takes on reality, time, and the outworking of God in the world.

OC, the Lord Himself told us that we speak death with "..... the tongue no one among men is able to tame; it is a restless evil, full of deadly poison."

Through the Apostle James He spoke these words to us, that we ought to consider them and weigh our own behavior. He also told us to watch out for planks in our eye as we point out specks. Are you hearing Him, CJ? I am.

You still sin today OC, and yet declare at the top of your lungs that you are for God on this earth.

How much more difficult would this have been for you if you were not able to read the words of the bible for yourself.

I get more out of listening to scripture being read than I do from reading it myself. However, it is not an either/or- I feed from the scripture, and I commune upon scripture with my brethren. Bereft of one or the other, I woul be malnourished.

Read again what I wrote,..... "The Reformation was the initiation of the outward manifestation of the Church of God, after hundreds of years of remaining hidden."

I read what you wrote. I also read this
"Wisdom is known by her children"
and
"A tree is known by its fruit"

I merely pointed out the fruit. Now yu want to tell me there's good Olive under the split bark of the War Tree.

How so? The unity of God is expressed in the factiousness of our time? In the ubiquitous attacks upon those who have remained in unity?

You speak out of both sides of your mouth above and have no clue as to having done so.

People who speak out of one side of their mouth look very strange.

OC, you don't know what the oneness of God is, much less know what it looks like. Hence your meaningless statement above.

For sure you and others like you have formed a common union upon your beliefs in the religion of the Orthodox institution, as have the Romanist, the Lutherens, the Baptists, the Pentecostals, and on and on. All that's left now is for some to argue length of standing or find justification in belief systems.

What a fraud is being perpetuated. The common, vain fraud of men.

Your "unity" is nothing to God. The way of man is nothing to God. And yet you invoke it as some sort of validation.



What makes us one with God OC, the doctrines/forms/tradition of men or the life He has placed in our regenerated spirit?

Find the answer and you will find the only ground of oneness God recognizes.

I'm at a loss to understand how you can speak of Oneness with a straight face. You seem to be at one with those who agree with you.

 

[fiat]

cj,
Hopefully this will help clarify "body of Christ" and "bride of Christ."

Para. 796: The unity of Christ and the Church, head and members of one Body, also implies the distinction of the two within a personal relationship. This aspect is often expressed by the image of bridegroom and bride. . . . The Lord referred to himself as the "bridegroom" (Mk 2:19). The Apostle speaks of the whole Church and of each of the faithful, members of his Body, as a bride "betrothed" to Christ the Lord so as to become but one spirit with him (Cf. Mt 22:1-14; 25:1-13; 1 Cor 6:15-17; 2 Cor 11:2). The Church is the spotless bride of the spotless Lamb (Cf. Rev 22:17; Eph 1:4; 5:27). "Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her" (Eph 5:25-26). He has joined her with himself in an everlasting covenant and never stops caring for her as for his own body . . . (Cf. Eph 5:29).

Yes, Christ promised to build the Church and boy did He ever! :wink: Knowing human weakness, He didn't leave us susceptible to the whims of various different religious leaders. Rather, He appointed a Steward, a "keeper of the keys" (Mt. 16:18-19; Is. 22:15-25), he gave the Church His Holy Spirit the Paraclete to enable the Church to be "a pillar and bulwark of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15), and gave the Apostle's His voice 'He who hears you, hears me' (Lk. 10:16) so that the sheep might continue to follow the voice of the Shepherd.

As you say, I am no saint and have a great deal to learn. No argument there! :wink: God is jealous for our souls as a husband for his wife, so we must strive constantly to "be perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect." Since we continue to fall, daily repentance and conversion is part of our Christian life...God's glory is manifest in our weakness. However, the Church has already been made clean by Him. As we read in Ephesians, "...Christ love the Church and sacrificed himself for her to make her holy. He made her clean by washing her in water with a form of words, so that when he took her to himself she would be glorious, with no speck or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and faultless.

 

[cj]

cj,
Hopefully this will help clarify "body of Christ" and "bride of Christ."

Para. 796: The unity of Christ and the Church, head and members of one Body, also implies the distinction of the two within a personal relationship. This aspect is often expressed by the image of bridegroom and bride. . . . The Lord referred to himself as the "bridegroom" (Mk 2:19). The Apostle speaks of the whole Church and of each of the faithful, members of his Body, as a bride "betrothed" to Christ the Lord so as to become but one spirit with him (Cf. Mt 22:1-14; 25:1-13; 1 Cor 6:15-17; 2 Cor 11:2). The Church is the spotless bride of the spotless Lamb (Cf. Rev 22:17; Eph 1:4; 5:27). "Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her" (Eph 5:25-26). He has joined her with himself in an everlasting covenant and never stops caring for her as for his own body . . . (Cf. Eph 5:29).

Fiat, what you presented above can be found in scripture, you've presented nothing more than a brief overview of the body of Christ, a simple view of something that has far more depth.

But are you able to give a deeper view of the significance of what you said above?

Millions upon millions of people know who Jesus is, but do they really know Him?

Yes, Christ promised to build the Church and boy did He ever! :wink: Knowing human weakness, He didn't leave us susceptible to the whims of various different religious leaders. Rather, He appointed a Steward, a "keeper of the keys" (Mt. 16:18-19; Is. 22:15-25), he gave the Church His Holy Spirit the Paraclete to enable the Church to be "a pillar and bulwark of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15), and gave the Apostle's His voice 'He who hears you, hears me' (Lk. 10:16) so that the sheep might continue to follow the voice of the Shepherd.

You know what's sad about what you said above,........ nowhere did you declare that Christ gave us Himself.

And yet scripture tells us that He did.


Fiat, Isaiah 22:15-25 is speaking about Christ.

And Matthew 16:18-19 speaks about the keys which Christ, Him on who's shoulders God has placed the keys, gives to Peter. These keys were concerning the kingdom of the heavens, which has to do with the church. And Peter used these keys on the day of Pentecost to allow the Jews to enter into the church, and on the day at the house of Cornelius to allow the gentiles to enter the church. So now, both Jew and Gentile have access to the Kingdom of the heavens, which is the church.

........ Since we continue to fall, daily repentance and conversion is part of our Christian life...God's glory is manifest in our weakness. However, the Church has already been made clean by Him. As we read in Ephesians, "...Christ love the Church and sacrificed himself for her to make her holy. He made her clean by washing her in water with a form of words, so that when he took her to himself she would be glorious, with no speck or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and faultless.

Make up your mind, which is it?

You say you are a part of the church and that you still sin, and then you say that the church is sinless,...... what gives?


Fiat, the church is Christ, and only Christ. In this sense it is sinless and perfect. But Christ desires a corporate body from among men, and therefore seeing that only He is the perfect element that this body must be made of, He needs to become us and us become Him. And this is what is being carried out by the Spirit in all those who believe

The church in its perfection is just Christ, not some man-made institution.

And even more, this perfect church is in every believer, for Christ comes to live in everyone who believes.


And the manifestation of this perfect church, Christ in His believing body, is just Christ lived out of His believing body, and not some man-made religious institution.


In love,
cj

 

[cj]

"Under" ministry- maybe in your view those who minister are "over"- but the very word ministry has the notion of undergirding, not overbearing.

I would humbly advise you keep that in mind.

OC, you loudly declare that you are Orthodox,..... this is a declaration of you willingly choosing to place yourself UNDER the ministry of the Orthodox religious institution.

But so as not to have your poor explanation of the reality of the word ministry corrupt the minds of the saints who might read it, lets give a proper and scriptural view of what ministry is......

Acts 18:24-28,

"And a certain Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, an eloquent man, arrived at Ephesus, and he was powerful in the Scriptures.

This man was....... instructed...... in the way of the Lord, and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. And this man began to speak boldly in the synagogue.

And when Priscilla and Aquila heard him,...... they took him to themselves and expounded the way of God to him more accurately.

And when he intended to pass through into Achaia, the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he arrived there, he helped much through grace those who had believed; For he vigorously confuted the Jews publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ."


So what do we have in the verses above? We have Apollos, someone who because of being instructed had understanding of Jesus, giving himself to two other saints so that he may receive more instruction. And by doing this, Apollos had added to his own being that which these two saints had received from Paul, and thus Apollos when speaking, spoke out of a more abundant supply of God's one ministry.


OC, by "poor ministry" I meant man's ministry and not God's ministry. For there is only one rich ministry, and that is God's one ministry.

But once again, you turn to the thoughts of men for understanding and comparison.

My brother, by being under Christ as the Head of all things, believers most certainly are in Him and thus are over all things as He is.

There is a divine principle that declares "To be under is to also be over."

So sez you.
Matthew 15:1-12
Revelation 21:6-8
Matthew 10:38
2 Thessalonians 1:1-5
2 Timothy 2:12
Luke 9:62
Salvation is in the name of Christ, a concept you think means "say Jesus like a password and you're in."

Sorry, not so.

You preach a truncated gospel, which is worse than a completely falsified gospel.

"Truncated gospel"........ you are scratching the bottom of your apostate barrel OC.

Salvation is having the Seed of life placed in the center of your being, your spirit.

A Seed that will never fail at accomplishing Its goal, never be corrupted by its environment.

A man, having once received this Seed, belongs to this Seed, and all that this Seed is and desires to fulfill.

You spew silliness out of your mouth when you suggest the lie that I have the concept of salvation being "..... say Jesus like a password and you're in."

Away with your lies OC, servant of man's vanity. For the Lord knows that I fully believe that a man must also believe from his heart. Thus for you to say otherwise in your post declares that you are a liar.

Notice, OC, you did not say that I might have this concept,.... no, you declare with a serpent-like divisive heart that I HAVE this concept.

Which spirit convinced you of this lie OC?


Anyway, so as not to go long on this response I'll speak to the verses you presented in another post.

For now, lets look at your following condemnation of God......

"He looks after drunks and fools, for His mercy is forever.

God's mercy towards the lost is not synonymous with His preservation of His Church.

And so is OC declaring that the preservation of God's church is not according to His mercy?

And from what of God came forth His great grace towards a saint like Paul?

OC, your blindness of the truth contained in the scriptures becomes more obvious each day.

Tell me OC, by what was Jesus in His humanity kept/preserved?

On the contrary, this is just word games on your part. The Orthodox place a greater emphasis on what is happening on the inside than any other tradition or non-tradition tradition.

Wonderful,..... now just declare this reality by rejecting a need for man-made outward stimulation of fancy/ornate buildings, overt forms and dead traditions, and man's fales doctrines.

Prayer, reading the word, fellowship of the saints, the one completing ministry of God, this is all we need.

OC, I have never said that the Orthodox institution is empty of any truth, what I have said is this truth has become corrupted, and thus, according to God's word, is good for nothing but to be thrown out.

I've said to you before, I am more orthodox than the Orthodox. But, in the pattern of our Lord and His apostles, I reject that which has passed away and been replaced by Christ in me.

My regenerated spirit is the temple of God, not some ornate building. My turning to, appreciation and caring for, my spirit (the temple of God), is the true worship/service of a believer, and not the outward folly traditions and forms of religion as found in the apostate institutions.

God is Spirit, and those who worship Him do so in spirit and reality.

There is no "reality" in any of the buildings, forms, and traditions of men.

The best that can be found in a man-made altar, or incense holder, or symbol (eg. a cross) is a kind of typology of the Reality, a picture of an aspect of the Reality.

But now we have the Reality, and all that your pretty outward folly does is serve to distract believers from the truth of our possessing this Reality.

And this is why God calls it wickedness, for your corrupt system of folly only brings the believer back into bondage.

Every single item found in the only man-made temple of God, the Tabernacle which became the temple in Jerusalem, finds its reality in Christ,..... and Christ has come, and therefore negate the need for any of the shadows.

But the institution that you serve, and others like it, perpetuate the shadow, and even worship the shadow, and thus disregard the Reality.

This is to your shame.


I'll continue in another post, as there is so much misleading speaking being presented by yourself that I am burdened to confront.


In love,
cj

 

[cj]

Let us look at "Laodicea" in action right here in the words of the Orthodox one........

OC says,

.... I understand that, if one uses John's Apocalypse as a crystal ball, they would be disinclined to study the historical context.

Case in point: you make a comparison between Rome, The East and Laodicea........... I point out that God's final judgement came as promised upon Laodicea,...... and has not upon either Rome or Constantinople- ergo, analogy is broke......... Rather than acknowledge the impotence of your analogy, you attempt to make me appear less spiritual just because I have taken some time to get to know what I'm talking about.

Broke.

"..... and has not (come) upon either Rome or Constantinople...."

By these words, OC has said that since we can physically see that the Roman and Orthodox institutions stand today, it should be obvious that these institutions are in a sense approved by God, unlike "the church" in Laodicea.

Or in other words, the outward proves the inward.

How ungodly this reasoning is. How against God's word are OC's words.

The fact is, God is not limited by time, and throughout man's history we can find God "allowing" wickedness to remain for His purpose.

Or maybe OC has turned a deaf ear to the reality of one called Satan.

Tell me OC, how long has Satan been allowed to roam?

And yet, in your Laodiean-like pride you declare "Look, look,.... all is still standing. We must be right with God."

Now saints, lets "look" at the scripture that tells us of these men, such as OC,....

Revelation 3:17 - 19,

".... Because you say, I am wealthy and have become rich and have need of nothing, and do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined by fire that you may be rich, and white garments that you may be clothed and that the shame of your nakedness may not be manifested, and eyesalve to anoint your eyes that you may see.

As many as I love I reprove and discipline; be zealous therefore and repent....."

OC looks at his precious Orthodox institution and says "I am wealthy and have become rich and have need of nothing,...."

Yet the Merciful one declares of OC and those like him, "... you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,"


Lets read how he ends this speaking....

Rather than acknowledge the impotence of your analogy, you attempt to make me appear less spiritual just because..... I have taken some time to get to know what I'm talking about.

Yes OC, you have taken time to learn. Unfortunately though, you have learned in error, and thus in truth know little.


Then OC concludes with this thought concerning my speaking.

Broke.

And to it I say, "Amen", for I am by the Lord's hand/mercy, broke, and being broken.

And although OC meant it as an insult, the Lord knows the truth of this matter. And that's all that really matters.


OC, by your own words you have exposed to all on these boards that your being is one with that of the Laodicean believers as revealed in the Lord's epistle to them. And this is as a result of that to which you have sold yourself to.

Your own words OC,.... by your own words.

In love,
cj