Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 08/08/07 06:25:50 PM |
Age 44, MI |
I believe your understanding of the biblical text is misinformed. Many biblical scholars, including some solid evangelical protestants, realize that Jesus was calling Peter "the rock"; Jesus was not refering to Peter's statement. Jesus was using a play on words that is most truly understood in the Aramaic which Jesus would have spoken. The Greek doesn't represent the Aramaic very well, and, of course, protestants rely on the Greek to verify their understanding of the text.
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/25/07 08:19:51 AM |
Age 60, OH |
It is my understanding that the scripture that the roman catholics use to say that peter was given the authority to start the church was when Christ said in response to peters reply to Christs question to peter of "who do you think I am" peter then said you are the christ, then Christ said "upon this rock I will build my church" meaning that he was the Christ and GOD and upon HIS being BOTH, THAT is the ROCK he will build his Church upon, NOT peter!!!!!
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/23/07 10:14:13 AM |
Age 36, TX |
"If there is only one truth, how can so many Christian communities disagree?"
I would posit that every "Christian" community would agree on the major elements of the truth of the Christian faith: There is one true God who created the universe (Gen 1:1). He is sovereign over all creation (1 Tim 6:15). He redeemed His people, Israel, from Egypt (Deut 13:5). He came in the form of the man, Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:1-36), in order to save everyone...Jew and Gentile (Rom 1:16) who will believe in Him (John 3:16-18), etc.
Many things beyond those foundational truths on which Christian communities disagree are the result of variations in interpretation and personal preferences in implementation: "do we have pews or chairs in the sanctuary?"; "what is the structure of leadership for our congregation?"; "do we sing classic hymns only or do we have contemporary praise and worship music?"; etc. I do not see this as an issue unless people in these communities are saying THEIR way of expressing their faith is the ONLY way to achieve salvation. God created several million species of beetles which is definitely more than the quoted 30,000 variants of the Christian faith expressed by the previous poster. Each type of beetle has their own unique characteristics and yet they are all still beetles. I don't see that variations in the expression of our Christian faith somehow make any one group of us less than Christian.
If the previous poster's suggestion was that the Holy Roman Catholic Church of today is the church that Jesus instituted I would respectfully but strongly disagree. Here is a good website that outlines several of the errors that have crept into the Catholic Church over time that have taken it away from the original path that Jesus left with his disciples: http://www.carm.org/catholic.htm . I would also suggest that the Protestants do not have it all figured out either.
The word we translate as "church" in English comes from the Greek word "ecclesia" in the New Testament. Ecclesia means "the assembly" or "called-out ones". For those familiar with the Strong's numbering system it is Strong’s #1577. That is the same word used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) in Deuteronomy 9:10: "The LORD gave me the two tablets of stone written by the finger of God; and on them were all the words which the LORD had spoken with you at the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the ASSEMBLY." The word ASSEMBLY there could equally be translated as CHURCH. It means the same thing. God desires that none (Jew or Gentile) should perish but all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Jesus never tought anyone to "get their heart right with Him" or to say "the sinners prayer" but He said "repent" (Matt 3:2, Matt 4:17, Mark 1:15) and he gave the message of repentance to his disciples (Mark 6:12, Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19, etc). What are we commanded to repent (turn away) from? Sin! What is sin? Transgression of the Law (lawlessness) spoke of in 1 John 3:4.
May we all repent from the sin in our lives and walk in the ways of our Lord and Savior Jesus. "He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" Micah 6:8
|
Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/18/07 02:54:40 PM |
Age 60, KS |
I think one could call this a "holy war" of words. Where to start.......
I think the good thing is that God is blessing everyone contributing to this site as He agrees with and disagrees with them all. Hmmm, that may be a tough concept.
On to those bad ole Catholics and their adoration of Mary. Did you note the word adoration and not worship? Did not God use Mary to give birth to His Son? Maybe some appreciation is in order here. God picked her for a reason.
The Catholic bible and most other Christian bibles are the same except the Catholic bible includes the apocrypha which many consider dubious. The Mass is filled with the same scripture everyone else uses.
As for bad clergy, the protestant churches have plenty of them as well. We must understand that these are men who are fallible and are sinners just like the rest of us. I remember when a well know TV preacher was defrocked because of his association with a prostitute many years ago. I used to listen to him and the fact that he had an adulterous liason didn't mean the message he preached was wrong......he was wrong. Just because some Catholic priests are homosexual doesn't mean the church's message is in error. The priest's involved are in error.
Jesus has a really simple message of Love. As long as this message gets through to us, we're on our way to a great understanding.
|
Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/18/07 02:28:21 PM |
Age 60, KS |
Please believe me when I tell you that the "Catholics" are nobody's enemy. The enemy is ignorance and stupidity, of which there is an abundance.
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/18/07 11:50:19 AM |
Age 60, KS |
"Baptist churches were born out of the English Reformation movement of the early 1600’s. Around 1606, certain Puritan Separatists in Great Britain had withdrawn from the Church of England, protesting the civil control of that body. Some within the movement also objected to various theological ideas of the Puritan system. Hence, in about 1608 several left the Separatists and formed a new coalition. One of the leaders of this movement was John Smyth (c. 1554-1612), who went to Holland to avoid persecution."
Quoted from the Christian Courier
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/17/07 06:37:19 PM |
Age 67, LA |
THE HISTOY OF THE BAPTISTS GOT STRATED IN 1603 BY JOHN ROBINSON AND JOHN SMITH. THAT'S WHAT ALL THE ENCYCLOPEDIAS HAVE IN THEM. HOWEVER, ARE THEY INTO THE TRUTH?
GOD BLESS,
FR. RICHARD DALE
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/14/07 06:22:34 PM |
Age 50, AUSTRALIA |
Unity is not sameness
The body-used as a type of the church- has varying body systems. Each system is differentiated to accomplish its given purpose. If you put tissue from the liver into the heart, it would be rejected as foreign. However, functioning where it should and how it should that same liver tissue accomplishes a purpose for the good of the entire body- with no rejection to the overall body function.
The differences are actually God's way of keeping us under the control of the Head...not our own idea of how the church should look.
|
Re: Re: Re: Baptists?
| Posted On: 07/14/07 10:45:13 AM |
Age 44, MI |
Which of the hundreds of baptist churches (e.g., Southern, Northern, General Association of Regular Baptists [is there an association of irregular baptists?], American, North American, Primitive, Free Will, Reformed, and Independant Baptist) is the true church?
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/14/07 08:13:51 AM |
Age 52, FL |
I dare say the Catholic Church may have some competition with Islam. Is the Catholic Church going to do like they did in history? I hope not.
|
Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 05:38:02 PM |
Age 55, MN |
If there is only one truth, how can so many Christian communities disagree? Jesus said," remain as one, as I am one, for the evil one wishes to separate you like the chaff from the wheat". There are more than 30,000 breakaways from the first church that was instituted by Christ. How can they all teach a different truth? It is pride that separates us. Pride is what lost the garden of Eden.
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 11:30:26 AM |
Age 79, MO |
With all due respect, I am curious to know exactly what you think Jesus was saying when He said to the thief on the cross: "Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with Me in paradise".
At that time paradise was where the redeemed up to that point were. Between it and the "place of torment" where the rich man was, there was a great gulf fixed.
If the words of Jesus were not assurance to the thief that he was redeemed, then what were they?
Did the theif have to be prayed out of "pergatory"? Which incidentally, there is no such place in the Bible.
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 09:32:08 AM |
Age 32, NC |
Great post Jan, but it would be important to note that it is not enough for Christians to support prayer as long as it is to a monotheistic god. By calling monotheistic prayer a prayer to the "one true God" as you did in your article you are in essence condoning syncretism. For a prayer to be to the "one true God", it must be more than merely monotheistic; it must be Trinitarian and through the atonement of Christ which God Himself has made a prerequisite.
This has been a disagreement of mine with Mr. Barton (someone whom I greatly respect) in the past. In complete speculation, it sounds as if Mr. Barton is at least sympathetic to the Masonic/syncretistic views of the Founding Fathers. I appreciate the "freedom of religion" provided by our country and would NOT seek to establish a Christian theocracy, but as a Christian I cannot say that religions are equal as long as they are monotheistic.
I am sure (having listen to your program many times) that you would agree with my distinctions, but I felt that they needed to be expressed on this issue.
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 09:25:49 AM |
Age 44, IN |
Naturalism is the belief that nature is all there is. It denies a reality of a supernatural realm. As the late Carl Sagan so bodly stated, "The cosmos is all there is, all there ever was and all there ever will be", Sagan suffered from relying heavily on his ability to reason through the material world using scientific methodology.
Our culture's adherence to naturalism is strengthened by a religiously-competing set of ideas. This competing set of ideas is in not considered religious and therefore is socially acceptable.
Evolution replaces Genesis 1:1. Respect for church and religion diminished as respect for science and universities, increased. Please don't misunderstand--there is nothing inherently bad in science or the universities. But ultimate truth cannot be found through only man's ability to reason and the material world.
The above is why post-modernism, the emergent church and weakening of the our culture to believe that in fact--one can know--that A is not non-A. The above is also related to the inability to progress very far in discussions regarding God's nature and will. The above is why historically reliable and credible accounts of miracles in the Bible are not received in the "Spirit" to which they were sent. They were sent in a SUPER-NATURAL Spirit--not a natural spirit. When we receive revelation through the Bible, we should receive it as though it is not natural.
Catholicism allows on-going revelation through the Pope in regards to Scripture. Bible based Christians do non agree that Scripture is flawed. If the Bible isn't broken, why do others keep fixing it--instead of studying it in the Spirit to which it was revealed? Super-naturally.
The issue of origins of the Cosmos is an important issue that might help God's church in the future. It is a point of agreement between Christians and Muslims. Muslims agree with Genesis 1:1, they don't agree with Darwin.
God's church needs to get more strategic about where to start discussions and where to end "on-going" revisions and on-going non-supernatural revelation.
|
Re: Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 09:17:52 AM |
Age 44, MI |
I would like to know where you received your information about the Catholic Church? Have you read Catholic sources or just Protestant ones? I have been studying the Catholic church for the last few years, reading both Protestant and Catholic sources, and I have concluded that the Catholic Church has just as much a claim to being the "True" church as any of the many Protestant sects. Do I argee with all the Catholic Churc teaches? No! However, I haven't found any Protestant sects that have a perfect understanding of the Bible and totally sound theology either. It's hard for me to take the Protestant sects seriously when none of them can agree about what is truth and sound theology. At least the Catholic Church can trace its theology to the early church and can claim that it is "One". Something that the Protestant church cannot do. Vince
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/13/07 07:07:12 AM |
Age 48, FL |
I have not read the document to which this article refers - yet. However, I was raised in a Protestant church and have an evangelical background. I became Catholic later as an adult. I was raised with very anti-Catholic beliefs (including the belief that the Roman Catholic Church was the "whore of Babylon") - all of which I found to be totally false. It appears that this article misunderstands and misinterprets Catholic Christian beliefs and teachings. The Catholic Church accepts Christians outside the church as true Christians, but believes that these Christians are outside the fellowship of Christ's true Church - that the Church is sadly and unnecessarily fractured. The Catholic Church does not teach that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. If, for instance, you were to join the Catholic Church, the Church would accept your baptism, etc. as valid and not require you to be rebaptized at confirmation. Catholic Christians consider Protestants as true brothers and sisters in Christ. I find it very hard to believe that articles with titles such as "Pope Starts Holy War" is accomplishing the Lord's work among his People.
|
Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/12/07 11:09:13 PM |
Age 60, MI |
Your question: Where was the true "Church" before the Protestant Reformation? Was it Catholic or something else
Your answer: The true church was with the Baptists. Check out the history of the Baptists to find out the truth.
|
Re: Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/12/07 09:35:08 PM |
Age 79, MO |
Jesus himself said: "except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God"
He also said: "I am THE way, THE truth, and THE life, no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me".
It doesn't matter what your denomination is. Belonging to a church organization will never save you.
I happen to belong to a Baptist church, but that is not the reason I am saved and going to heaven.
I am saved because Jesus Christ died for my sin. I have confessed that I am a sinner. I have repented of those sins, and have recieved Him as my Lord and Savior.
On that basis, I am a member of the true church, which the Bible calls the Body of Christ. If you haven't done that then it doesn't matter what name is over the door of your church building. You are still in your sin and lost.
|
Re: Pope Starts Holy War
| Posted On: 07/12/07 06:15:22 PM |
Age 56, KS |
I believe the article is true and accurate. I think the US is in for alot of future problems because of letting false gods into our country and trying to rid us of our countries true God, Jehovah. There is only one way to the Father God and that is Jesus our Lord and Savior. Entry to heaven has nothing to do with any certain church or denomination you attend or proclaim but a faith in Christ and Christ alone.If I am wrong I sure haven't found in my Bible yet!God Bless in Christ's Holy Name
|
Not the end of Ecumenicalism; that's what this is. . .
| Posted On: 07/12/07 06:03:14 PM |
Age 39, MO |
Agree with the prior comment that there’s really nothing new here. The document in question is a response to questions raised in the wake of other clarifications and so on to Vatican II back in 1962-65. What was declared in Vatican II (on which I am also no expert) has been debated, interpreted variously, and so on ever since. Which is also nothing new – theology is always debated.
Having said that, it’s important in fairness to point out that CURRENT Catholic doctrine, whatever it may have been in centuries past, does NOT deny salvation to non-Catholics. The actual text of the “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine On The Church” makes this clear: “separated churches and communities. . . are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact, the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation. . . .” (from response to the Third Question)
On the other hand, Catholic doctrine DOES say that non-Catholic churches aren’t really the Church of God. God does work in them for salvation, but He does so with elements of the grace and truth that belong to the one true church, which is the Catholic Church. Thus all that is good and true in a non-catholic church is really catholic in and of itself, and should properly be [re]united visibly (and presumably formally) with the Catholic Church in actual fact. (Which looks like Catholic ecumenicalism to me; so I don’t think that has ended by virtue of this document.)
So Catholic doctrine is not denying salvation to Protestants, but saying “you really ought to be over here; this is the Church as it should be”.
Allowing for partial truth doesn’t completely denigrate non-Catholic churches, but at the same time, saying that partial truth equals partial catholic truth allows for reunification without “compromise”. (i.e. “We’re really uniting with our own; they just didn’t know it before”)
I’m Baptist, and I naturally think he, and they, are wrong, but more so in focus and application rather than principle. The one true church is not the Catholic Church, it is the church “invisible”, consisting of true believers/the truly redeemed out of whatever physical church they may be part of. But the basic principle of God working in any church (including the Catholic church), and thus salvation of individuals within any church, without validating the church structure itself, is valid, as is the idea of proper and eventual union of those individuals as believers and members of the true church.
That’s not the problem with ecumenicalism; the problem is when you try to mash or blend together the “visible” churches into one, ignoring rather than resolving the very real doctrinal difficulties, and mistaking the formal structure of the church for the spiritual reality of it. That won’t work, at least not while retaining anything of the Spirit of God in the result. Take God out of it, and it works pretty well, as evidenced by a whole lot of what we see going on around us today.
|
|
|
|
|
