D
Dokimas
Guest
:crying:
- Status
B
Black_Knight
Guest
C
CWBetts
Guest
I think calling the Reformation can be more accurately called the “deformation.” All Luther, Calvin, ad the other heretics accomplished was to cause division among Christians by deforming the true faith into some man-made monstrosity. If you have nothing to add to the conversation then begone! I would like to see some kind of reasoned defense of the heresies of Luther, Calvin, and their ilk.
C
ChadS
Guest
If pointing out historical facts warrants threats – then so be it. I don’t see how you can possibly take issue with pointing out something that is verifiable – if what I posted was in error then tell me where I was wrong, not that I’m somehow speaking out of turn for committing the sin of defending a Protestant.
I also guess you missed the part of my post where I said I wasn’t endorsing those ideas merely saying that they were in circulation prior to Luther.
ChadS
D
Dokimas
Guest
There are non so blind as those that will not see.
S
Shiranui117
Guest
Speaking as something of a former non-demon myself, and with my mother attending a non-denom church whenever she has the time (not often), my experience has been this:
The church I attended for a while explained in one of its introductory bulletins that they call themselves non-denominational because they do not want to say that they are Lutheran or Methodist or Baptist or Pentecostal because those groups fight with and distrust each other. So, the non-denominationals try to “get back to the basics” of being Christian, holding no doctines and having no saints; in their eyes, it is doctrines that cause differences, so they hold the logic that if they get rid of doctrine, they get rid of disunity. They have the basic baptism of believers and communion, but they will NOT tell you what it is or is not or what is or isn’t wrong; they are Sola Scriptura to the extreme, not even wanting to interpret the Scriptures; only reading them and understanding them. In many ways, their efforts are admirable. Ultimately, however, their lack of a standard of orthodoxy makes them little more than Christians (many are devout, I will say) that are afraid to give you an in-depth look on what their faith is; the tip is the whole iceberg.
The church I attended for a while explained in one of its introductory bulletins that they call themselves non-denominational because they do not want to say that they are Lutheran or Methodist or Baptist or Pentecostal because those groups fight with and distrust each other. So, the non-denominationals try to “get back to the basics” of being Christian, holding no doctines and having no saints; in their eyes, it is doctrines that cause differences, so they hold the logic that if they get rid of doctrine, they get rid of disunity. They have the basic baptism of believers and communion, but they will NOT tell you what it is or is not or what is or isn’t wrong; they are Sola Scriptura to the extreme, not even wanting to interpret the Scriptures; only reading them and understanding them. In many ways, their efforts are admirable. Ultimately, however, their lack of a standard of orthodoxy makes them little more than Christians (many are devout, I will say) that are afraid to give you an in-depth look on what their faith is; the tip is the whole iceberg.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Exactly. You refuse to see the truth. That is that the heretical doctrines of Sola FIde and Sola Scriptura have no basis either in Scripture or Tradition. It is more important to you to oppose the Catholic Church.
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
I see.
No, to be honest, not really.
Did I hurt your feelings? And is that the reason why you haven’t answered my questions? If I were to appologize Carl, beg forgiveness, then could we be like friends?
My real name is Tom. Actually, it’s Thomas. I haven’t been to seminary so I don’t have advanced training like you. But I do have a secular 4 year degree and I study a lot of theology as a hobby. Systematic theology, historical development of theology, Early church theology, history of the first 5 centuries of the church, modern evangelical theology. I have some college level training in Life of Christ and several New Testament books, I’m fairly conversant with the ANFs and Catholic councils from Trent to V2. In my personal library (which contains approx 950 books on the christian faith) contains 10 or 12 multi volume systematic theology books representing most major schools within protestantism and many single volume works on issues within evangelicalism. I consider myself a pre-mil dispensationalist. I read through the Bible cover to cover 2 or 3 times per year.
So, Carl, I know it shouldn’t, but it does bother me when someone misrepresents a basic historical fact. So for this, I forgive you and please know that I had no idea that you were offended by my inquiry.
Your friend (hopefully) Tom
I
Izdaari
Guest
Bob Dylan wrote Mighty Quinn (Quinn the Eskimo). But Manfred Mann made it popular. Much like Hus and Luther, eh?
C
ChadS
Guest
Exactly!! .Bob Dylan wrote Mighty Quinn (Quinn the Eskimo). But Manfred Mann made it popular. Much like Hus and Luther, eh?
Great reference btw.
I was also thinking of “Blinded by the Light” – originally released by Bruce Springsteen but made popular by Manfred Mann.
Manfred Mann is Martin Luther!!
ChadS
S
Sharon125
Guest
I think all non-denominational churches are actually non-denominational protestant. Those attending probably don’t understand that. They probably welcome Catholics and think that means that they’re not protestant.
I like the concept of non-denominational protestant churches. Some of the denominations are getting involved in politics. I think this happens when their governments get too big. Non-denominational churches are less likely to do that.
I like the concept of non-denominational protestant churches. Some of the denominations are getting involved in politics. I think this happens when their governments get too big. Non-denominational churches are less likely to do that.
C
CWBetts
Guest
I do not like the idea of any ecclesiastical community that holds to heretical doctrines. To say that they are a good thing is ecumenism gone mad.
D
Dokimas
Guest
It’s possible I’m a bit blind but I was referring to you.
C
CWBetts
Guest
I was blind, when I was Fundamentalist. Now I see the truth of the Catholic Church.It’s possible I’m a bit blind but I was referring to you.
1
1beleevr
Guest
I would venture to say that the jury is still out on whether being catholic is the best thing(at least from a noncatholic or former catholic point of view!) People call me Protestant, because I am not catholic or Jewish, although the Jews do have some rather intriguing rituals and customs! I was raised in a Southern Baptist home, but do not espouse that denomination, for reasons too numerous to mention here! I would rather be called a believer, or a withess for Christ, rather than be saddled with a religious title like Baptist, Methodist, Mormon, or catholic for that matter! I like nondenominational, because it does free you from some questionable doctrine, and petty squabbles by people who are not on the same page! Baptism is HUGE with our church, but not as washing your sns away; the Blood of Christ does that! Baptism is more like a wedding ceremony, or replicating Jesus’s death, burial, and resurection! So, if we didn’t have to go to confession, wear crucifixes, call the pope holy father, and skip meat on Fridays, catholicism would be more attractive:thumbsup:I’d say being Catholic is the best thing you could be. When you join, you already have a “package” waiting for you, that is, doctrines and dogmas and whatnot and a 2,000 year resume of scriptural interpretations and apostolic tradition. Its not like starting some “none denominational” church where in a single lifetime one tries to formulate an entire religion, and given that the Bible is so large, the beliefs often encompass only certain Bible verses while sometimes completely disregarding others.
In short, being Catholic is like buying a guitar fully strung, with an amplifier, tuner, pick, and everything you need. Starting a none denominational church can be like buying a guitar, unstrung, with nothing else.
C
ChadS
Guest
How does eschewing denominational titles free you from questionable doctrine? From what I can see you can be just as susceptible to those types of doctrines as any denomination is. It’s just that you can call it what you want and give it the spin you need. Any group that attempts to interpret scripture outside of Christ’s Church is bound to get something wrong and lead people astray.
ChadS
C
CWBetts
Guest
The foundation of non-denominationalism is questionable doctrine. Once saved always saved. rejection of infant baptism, “bible alone” are all doctrines that are lacking of any kind of basis in the Truth.
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
I can’t speak for anyone but myself. It is difficult to phrase my response to this audiance without being misunderstood and taking this thread off on a wild joy ride. I mean no offense.
I believe that the individual believer has a responsibility to seek out the Lord and his wisedom by tust and faith based on the teaching of the Bible and the leading of the Holy Spirit. In practical application, if I ask you as a Catholic what you believe with respect to what ever (Mary for example), I’m probably going to get the same answer from 99 out of 100 Catholics. However, in reality, some of those 99 are going to be just throwing out the CCC line so to speak not actually truly believing what they say but simply giving the answer they have been trained to give.
While in my camp, there may be some who give “spin” as you say but not this believer. I’m in a constant quest to seek out the Lords council and guidence. I recongnise that I cannot force anyone into submission to my thinking and I also accept that the freedom I claim for myself is a huge responsibility and one that I don’t take lightly.
To put it another way, my faith and my doctrine are mine and my responsibility. I understand that you view it as an act of rebellion and that is your right. It is also your right and privledge to place yourself under the authority of your church. You have that same burden and responsibility that I have however. I choose to base my faith on the Bible and it’s teaching, you place yours in your church. So when the time comes to give an account for our lives, we will present a totally different defense. My defense will be the Scriptures, yours will be the Church.
It is not really my place to question your faith decisions however I will defend my faith (just as you will) when necessary. In summery, while you believe that the RCC has a consistent rule of faith over the centuries, I believe that within that body there is a wide variety of divergent views not expressed and in my opinion the consistency you claim is not as important as many think. This is because God looks to the heart, which the Bible teaches is wicked in total.
M
mark_a
Guest
. . . and possibly some responsibility.
M
mark_a
Guest
- Status