Calling all non-Catholic Christians!

[jmcrae]

Ahhh you’re stating the same thing a different way. Are you saying Protestant churches rely on something else besides the Holy Spirit?? If they do what is it? If not then who’s right??

Well, all except one of the Christian churches, that one being the one that Christ established and is protecting, are relying on their personal opinions, the will’o the wisp, “anything but [name your favourite bad guy]”, and/or the old burnin’ in the bosom.

Or just whatever seems good to them from a human point of view, at the time.

In 1930, for the first time in human history, birth control became legal - why? Not because they thought birth control in and of itself was a good thing (it’s not like they were going to recommend it to their own daughters or anything), but because there were too many poor people having too many kids, and it seemed like a cheap and easy way to clean up the streets - if they quit breeding, they’ll quit begging, was the logic behind that. The Protestant churches got behind it because there was a Depression on, and they figured it was a fad that wouldn’t last - once the poor were wiped out, everyone would go back to having kids and creating family legacies. (Homosexual marriage wasn’t even on their radar - if anybody had told them that a generation raised to accept birth control wouldn’t be able to see what was wrong with homosexual marriage, they’d have laughed. Oh - wait - somebody did tell them. It was the Pope. And yeah, they laughed. Silly old man, out of touch with reality. Pay no attention. )

I’m not saying Roman Catholics ARE Gnostics. I’m saying one thing the gnostics claimed was that the Holy Spirit spoke only to them. What are the Roman Catholics claiming? Same thing. It’s called infallibility. Why are they infallible and let’s say methodists aren’t. Or are they both fallible.

Maybe it’s the Methodists and maybe it’s the Catholics. Maybe it’s the Mormons, for all we know. But we know that the Church Christ founded is infallible, so all we have to do is find it.

Member yes, but the Roman Catholic church will not allow you to comment on doctrine. This is what I’m referring to. To become a member assumes you subscribe to their doctrine. What if you don’t? Will they entertain your ideas? If you could remotely be right will they consider it?

Scott Hahn (former Presbyterian minister) sure seems to be doing okay …

 

[wisdomseeker]

When we come to HIM that puts us in HIS church. A church isn’t a physical building that Jesus built and then said make sure you go here. Christ’s church ARE HIS followers. If Christ came to us right now he wouldn’t go to Rome looking for HIS people. We would be running to HIM.

wouldnt you agree when someone builds something something is built. and why Jesus became visible just to tell us He was about to build something invisible through visible men like the apostles? I guess what you are saying is just that. that whatever Jesus said or did is all invisible. or maybe He did not really meant none of it. or maybe He came just for the apostles after that who cares, the next generation does not really matter they will be smart enough to speak for me.
to much confusion on your part.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’ll only speak for my church. What better authority can you get than someone who was commissioned directly by Jesus. So we would absoluely obey. Now don’t respond to this and say the Roman Catholic church was commisioned by Jesus, please. I think every church and every non-believer would be interested to hear what Paul has to say.

how can you tell? if you are the authority of determining the truth, then anyone can claim the same thing. that brings us to more confusion.
how can you even thinking that you know more than anybody else?

 

[khutcheson]

how can you tell? if you are the authority of determining the truth, then anyone can claim the same thing. that brings us to more confusion.
how can you even thinking that you know more than anybody else?

I didn’t see him saying that he knows more than anybody else. He simply said that that he and his Church would consider Paul an authority. Seems straightforward to me.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I didn’t see him saying that he knows more than anybody else. He simply said that that he and his Church would consider Paul an authority. Seems straightforward to me.

my reference is not only to this one post but on overall discussion.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**Thirdly, do they believe that the Scriptures are the basis for all beliefs and practices for a Christian? **

The funny thing is that the Bible itself does not teach this.

 

[qui_est_ce]

**Thirdly, do they believe that the Scriptures are the basis for all beliefs and practices for a Christian? **

The funny thing is that the Bible itself does not teach this.

Yes, but the Bible is irrelevant, because all you need is:

1. Jesus is the son of God
2. Jesus is GOD in the flesh
3. Jesus died on the cross
4. Jesus paid the one time price for our sins.
5. Believing IN Jesus gives us eternal life. Not just acknowledging who HE is. Truly accepting HIM as your savior

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’m not an expert on Protestant churches. Just mine which is non-denominational. I believe we preach the truth. My wife is Methodist. In all fairness I think they preach the truth. At least the important details which I outlined below.

Ok, I believe that you teach the truth if you teach what you said. But what if there is MORE that Jesus wants from us? Do you think you should do your best to find out what that is?

I personally love NLT. Bible that is.

How do you know this is an accurate translation. Remember the Tynesdale and Wycliffe “murderer’s” and “vinegar” bibles? How do you know there are not more or less books that should be inspired-inerrant? Wouldn’t you want the full true and most accurate version?

JWs - No. Jesus was absolutely GOD in the flesh.

Well they claim to use the most accurate translation NWV, to back up their claim that Jesus was "a Word, " and not “the Word”
Watchtower magazine dated 9 /15 /1950:

Preparing and releasing the “New World Translation”

      We acknowledge our debt to all the Bible versions which we have used in attaining to what truth of God’s Word we enjoy today.  We do not discourage the use of any of these Bible versions, but shall ourselves go on making suitable use of them.  However, during all our years of using these versions down to the latest of them, ***we have found them defective***. *** In one or another vital respect they are inconsistent and unsatisfactory, infected with religious traditions or worldly philosophy and hence not in harmony with the sacred truths which Jehovah God has restored ***to his devoted people who call upon his name and seek to serve him with one accord.  Especially has this been true in the case of the Christian Greek Scriptures (the New Testament), which throw light and place proper interpretation upon the ancient Hebrew Scriptures.  More and more the need has been felt for a translation in modern speech, in harmony with revealed truth, and yet furnishing us the basis for gaining further truth by faithfully presenting the sense of the original writings; a translation just as understandable to modern readers as the original writings of Christ’s disciples were understandable to the simple,*** plain, common, lowly readers ***of their day.

:bigyikes:

Mormons - No. Show me the golden tablets.

Show me the Ten Commandment Tablets
"http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Bible.shtml#lds:

Unlike many other Christian churches, Latter-day Saints believe that revelation from God has not ceased and that the canon of God’s revelations is not closed. We believe that we should live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God (Deut. 8:3, Matt. 4:4) and that God continues to reveal His words and to make sacred scripture available today as in days of old. One precious example of this is ***The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, an inspired translation of an ancient document from people in the New World who knew of the Messiah and had prophets of God among them. The Book of Mormon and the Bible together are part of the sacred writings accepted by Latter-day Saints. They are both part of the word of God, ***and we believe that God will yet reveal many other great things in the future. (The common objection about not adding to the word of God is dealt with below in detail - I’ll just note that while no man has the right to add anything to God’s word, God can speak as often as He wants and has historically ***added ***to His word whenever He has had prophets and apostles on the earth, as He does today.)

:nope:

qui:

Are you saying the the Pharisees could be the True Church?

No - Was commenting that they knew scripture extremely well. But as Jesus pointed out they didn’t realize it pointed to HIM. So absolutely no.

Maybe they were right, Jesus was not the one. Could Mohammed be the promised Messiah?

Didn’t think you were being obtuse. Just staying on point. Good job

Thanks

 

[guanophore]

The reformers would tell you that GOD sent them to fix the coruption. Not saying he did or didn’t but let’s face it. GOD not only allowed the reformers to survive, HE’s moved Roman Catholics over to their churches.

PEACE

I don’t think that disobedience and division should be blamed on God.

And what does any of this have to do with how to tell which church is the right one?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’m sorry, the below quote was from Deacon, not Wisdom seeker

1. Jesus is the son of God
2. Jesus is GOD in the flesh
3. Jesus died on the cross
4. Jesus paid the one time price for our sins.
5. Believing IN Jesus gives us eternal life. Not just acknowledging who HE is. Truly accepting HIM as your savior.

 

[qui_est_ce]

GOD not only allowed the reformers to survive, HE’s moved Roman Catholics over to their churches.

PEACE

That one will bite you.

God also allowed Evil to survive. Satan is still alive.

God has also moved some Reformer’s back home.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’ll only speak for my church. What better authority can you get than someone who was commissioned directly by Jesus. So we would absoluely obey. Now don’t respond to this and say the Roman Catholic church was commisioned by Jesus, please. I think every church and every non-believer would be interested to hear what Paul has to say.

some of us dont need to worry about that because we listen to Paul. he left us his letters which we use, read, live and believe everything he said is true and inspired by Jesus. and we obey.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Originally Posted by Deacon110
I’m not an expert on Protestant churches. Just mine which is non-denominational. I believe we preach the truth. My wife is Methodist. In all fairness I think they preach the truth. At least the important details which I outlined below.

Just wondering…
if you pay attention, you will notice that your answers is all about: i think, i believe, i i i i i and so on…
still you have not showed how you come to conclusion you know where the truth lies.
is it because you believe that this is truth and that is it?
because many people believe in many things, does it make it true?

 

[Deacon110]

wouldnt you agree when someone builds something something is built. and why Jesus became visible just to tell us He was about to build something invisible through visible men like the apostles? I guess what you are saying is just that. that whatever Jesus said or did is all invisible. or maybe He did not really meant none of it. or maybe He came just for the apostles after that who cares, the next generation does not really matter they will be smart enough to speak for me.
to much confusion on your part.

OK so show me the actual building that Jesus erected. Jesus says the spirit gives life. Show me the physical spirit. Did the people having church services in their houses constitute a building that Jesus constructed?? If yes then did he do this before he died or after??

The visible part of the church is the people. The invisible part is the Holy Spirit we all possess internally upon baptism. Unless you can show me that is visible too. Did the Ethiopian Eunich get baptized in a physical building?? Did Peter baptize the official’s family in a church building?? Let me save you the time. No, and ahh, no. Did they become part of Jesus church?? Yes. So then the church in that instance was the entire desert and the official’s house. I wonder if they had a sign outside that said Roman Catholic church. And how about the 3000 that were added at Pentecost?? Was that within a church?? Or was the outside immediate area around them blue sky and all the church??

Forgive my sarcastic remarks but your comments make no sense and the argument of visible/invisible church is just too old.

PEACE

 

[Deacon110]

Well, all except one of the Christian churches, that one being the one that Christ established and is protecting, are relying on their personal opinions, the will’o the wisp, “anything but [name your favourite bad guy]”, and/or the old burnin’ in the bosom.

Or just whatever seems good to them from a human point of view, at the time.

JMCRAE I love you but you’re not answering the question.

In 1930, for the first time in human history, birth control became legal - why? Not because they thought birth control in and of itself was a good thing (it’s not like they were going to recommend it to their own daughters or anything), but because there were too many poor people having too many kids, and it seemed like a cheap and easy way to clean up the streets - if they quit breeding, they’ll quit begging, was the logic behind that. The Protestant churches got behind it because there was a Depression on, and they figured it was a fad that wouldn’t last - once the poor were wiped out, everyone would go back to having kids and creating family legacies. (Homosexual marriage wasn’t even on their radar - if anybody had told them that a generation raised to accept birth control wouldn’t be able to see what was wrong with homosexual marriage, they’d have laughed. Oh - wait - somebody did tell them. It was the Pope. And yeah, they laughed. Silly old man, out of touch with reality. Pay no attention. )

Not sure what the point was here:shrug: Are you trying to demonstrate that the Pope was in touch by making a comment that the average Joe could have made??

Maybe it’s the Methodists and maybe it’s the Catholics. Maybe it’s the Mormons, for all we know. But we know that the Church Christ founded is infallible, so all we have to do is find it.

Take Mormons off the list for sure.

Scott Hahn (former Presbyterian minister) sure seems to be doing okay …

Is he changing doctrine??

 

[Deacon110]

how can you tell? if you are the authority of determining the truth, then anyone can claim the same thing. that brings us to more confusion.
how can you even thinking that you know more than anybody else?

Not sure what your response has to do with my comment. Please quote me showing where I state I know more than anybody else. I was merely assuming that if Paul were alive today we’d all listen to him.

Very confusing.

PEACE

 

[Deacon110]

Ok, I believe that you teach the truth if you teach what you said. But what if there is MORE that Jesus wants from us? Do you think you should do your best to find out what that is?
How do you know this is an accurate translation. Remember the Tynesdale and Wycliffe “murderer’s” and “vinegar” bibles? How do you know there are not more or less books that should be inspired-inerrant? Wouldn’t you want the full true and most accurate version?

Yes I most certainly would. But show it too me first. Then prove to me it’s not in the same camp as Tynesdale Wycliffe.

Well they claim to use the most accurate translation NWV, to back up their claim that Jesus was "a Word, " and not “the Word”
:bigyikes:

Show me the Ten Commandment Tablets
:nope:

True and True

Maybe they were right, Jesus was not the one. Could Mohammed be the promised Messiah?
Thanks

No. I don’t believe that. Why?? Mohammed was a decendant of Ishmael. GOD worked strictly through Isaac. Weren’t the Ishmaelites eventually destroyed??

 

[jmcrae]

JMCRAE I love you but you’re not answering the question.

Yes I am; read it again.

Not sure what the point was here:shrug: Are you trying to demonstrate that the Pope was in touch by making a comment that the average Joe could have made??

Point being that everybody laughed at him and went ahead with legalizing birth control, and he is being proven right.

Is he changing doctrine??

Not as such, but he’s coming up with some very interesting stuff that has never been seen before, such as the idea of the Fourth Cup, etc. Nobody is squelching him or telling him that he’s not allowed to play around with these ideas.

 

[Deacon110]

I don’t think that disobedience and division should be blamed on God.

Not blaming GOD for the disobedience. Just saying maybe he’s trying to fix it. Didn’t blame HIM for the disobedience in the old testament. But HE did split the kingdom. My point is that GOD intervened then and there’s no reason to think HE couldn’t intervene now.

And what does any of this have to do with how to tell which church is the right one?

It doesn’t it was an extension of an earlier point.

PEACE

 

[Deacon110]

I’m sorry, the below quote was from Deacon, not Wisdom seeker

Now don’t put words into my post I never said the Bible was irrelevant. I was asked about important beliefs.