History and "Biblical" Christianity

[1John_5_13]

What was the final authority for the early Christians

*All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: *

•                    11 Timothy 3:16*

**
What do the Scriptures teach about heaven? Can a person be 100% sure they will go to heaven when they die?

*These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may **know *that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

•                       1 John 5:13*

**
Will I get into Heaven if my good works outweigh my bad works?

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God : Not of works lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:8,9
**
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us…

•                                                 Titus 3:5*

**

**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**

 

[MaggieOH]

1John 5:13:

What was the final authority for the early Christians

*All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: *

•                    11 Timothy 3:16*

What do the Scriptures teach about heaven? Can a person be 100% sure they will go to heaven when they die?

*These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may **know ***that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

•                       1 John 5:13*

Will I get into Heaven if my good works outweigh my bad works?

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God : Not of works lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:8,9

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us…

•                                                 Titus 3:5*

This topic is not about the authority of Scripture. Please start a new thread and post there.

Maggie

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

1John 5:13:

What was the final authority for the early Christians

*All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: *
11 Timothy 3:16

What do the Scriptures teach about heaven? Can a person be 100% sure they will go to heaven when they die?

*These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may **know ***that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
1 John 5:13

Will I get into Heaven if my good works outweigh my bad works?

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God : Not of works lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:8,9

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us…
Titus 3:5

Hello my fundamental Babtist freind Guess what…Catholics don’t believe works save you We are saved by Grace

 

[1John_5_13]

My Catholic friend,

When you die and stand before God, and He asks you, why should I let you into My Heaven what will be your reply?
Please back up your answer with Scripture.

Thank You

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Nope, you hit the nail right on the head.

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

So, let’s see how this logic plays out, shall we.

1. Early Christian were more like the “Bible” Christians of today, then the Roman Catholic Church.
2. We have historical records of these early Christian by way of pagans, Jews and the early Christians themselves.
3. In the historical records is revealed what early Christians thought, believed and practiced.
4. In the historical records it reveals what the early Christians thought, believed and practiced are in line with Roman Catholic Teaching.
5. Therefore, premise 1 is false.

Any thoughts?

Peace

 

[dennisknapp]

1John 5:13:

My Catholic friend,

When you die and stand before God, and He asks you, why should I let you into My Heaven what will be your reply?
Please back up your answer with Scripture.

Thank You

Please deal with the argument of this thread:

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

So, let’s see how this logic plays out, shall we.

1. Early Christian were more like the “Bible” Christians of today, then the Roman Catholic Church.
2. We have historical records of these early Christian by way of pagans, Jews and the early Christians themselves.
3. In the historical records is revealed what early Christians thought, believed and practiced.
4. In the historical records it reveals what the early Christians thought, believed and practiced are in line with Roman Catholic Teaching.
5. Therefore, premise 1 is false.

Any thoughts?

BTW You would have to show how premise 4 is false.

Peace

 

[MaggieOH]

1John 5:13:

My Catholic friend,

When you die and stand before God, and He asks you, why should I let you into My Heaven what will be your reply?
Please back up your answer with Scripture.

Thank You

Your post has nothing to do with this thread. Please start your own thread

 

[Benadam]

MaggieOH:

Your post has nothing to do with this thread. Please start your own thread

I’m glad you guys channel the discussion back into it’s intended direction… I have habits of dialogue that make that difficult…

Just for clarification, posts should pertain to exposing more accurately the historical evidence that substantiates a particular view of what the Church seems to be in the bible?. If so, IMHO without a view from the perspective that has been authenticated how can one conclude an authentic view? Isn’t the 3D Jesus the only person who can do the sola?

 

[dennisknapp]

I’m glad you guys channel the discussion back into it’s intended direction… I have habits of dialogue that make that difficult…

Just for clarification, posts should pertain to exposing more accurately the historical evidence that substantiates a particular view of what the Church seems to be in the bible?. If so, IMHO without a view from the perspective that has been authenticated how can one conclude an authentic view? Isn’t the 3D Jesus the only person who can do the sola?

I have personally asked some very outspoken Protestants on this forum to join us on this thread, but have recieved no reply. I guess they do not value proper dialog.

Peace

 

[cyprian]

dennisknapp:

I have personally asked some very outspoken Protestants on this forum to join us on this thread, but have recieved no reply. I guess they do not value proper dialog.

Peace

Or maybe you have them thinking. the deeper I get into my faith (re-vert 25 years fell away) the more unbelievably rich and beautiful it becomes. God grants favors re: deeper understanding, to those who seek. Bible christians block themselves off from the apparent…why? Like I’ve said before, what’s to lose? I thought that when we become adults we start thinking for ourselves and not just listening to what other people who aren’t qualified, tell us. They say we follow the Church blindly, but we have and have developed the history. All the great and rich(content) writers they miss out on. I don’t get it. Babbled?

 

[Benadam]

dennisknapp:

I have personally asked some very outspoken Protestants on this forum to join us on this thread, but have recieved no reply. I guess they do not value proper dialog.

Peace

I have run into a few of your posts inviting them to join us. This is thread to go to. Oh well.

 

[dennisknapp]

Benadam:

I have run into a few of your posts inviting them to join us. This is thread to go to. Oh well.

Is it true? Have I finally come up with a thread that has stumped all Protestants on this forum?

I can’t believe it?

 

[MaggieOH]

1John 5:13:

My Catholic friend,

When you die and stand before God, and He asks you, why should I let you into My Heaven what will be your reply?
Please back up your answer with Scripture.

Thank You

Sandra,

when you die and stand before God what are you going to say when you have been denied entry?

Please back up your answer with Scripture

 

[MaggieOH]

dennisknapp:

I have personally asked some very outspoken Protestants on this forum to join us on this thread, but have recieved no reply. I guess they do not value proper dialog.

Peace

I will wager that they are afraid to come because anything that might be presented against what is written on their apologetics cards will stump them.

Take a look at the posting from 1John5:13. The person comes into a thread, does not take any notice of the topic heading and spouts off something that seems to be from rote. There is a formula that all of them use.

If you have a good look at some of the other postings from the same kind of person you can begin to see a pattern. Have a look at the threads on Mary and the attempt to hijack them with false accusations. They make their claim based upon not a study of the early church fathers, but after studying modern fallible commentators such as James White, Erik Svendsen and John MacArthur, amongst others who quite often write as though what they say is authoritative even if what is written is neither from Scripture or Sacred Tradition.

Again, if you have a good hard look at what is written and by different posters (though some posters are the same person) you can see a trend in the accusations and statements of those who claim to be Biblical Christians.

They make multiple claims that are supposed to support their claim to being the successors of the original chrisitans, yet they accept doctrines that were considered heresy by the early church fathers.

What is lacking in their attempts to claim themselves as historical is a general lack of consistency in doctrines.

Can you guess which groups lay claim to St. Patrick besides the Catholics?

Maggie

 

[dennisknapp]

MaggieOH:

I will wager that they are afraid to come because anything that might be presented against what is written on their apologetics cards will stump them.

Take a look at the posting from 1John5:13. The person comes into a thread, does not take any notice of the topic heading and spouts off something that seems to be from rote. There is a formula that all of them use.

If you have a good look at some of the other postings from the same kind of person you can begin to see a pattern. Have a look at the threads on Mary and the attempt to hijack them with false accusations. They make their claim based upon not a study of the early church fathers, but after studying modern fallible commentators such as James White, Erik Svendsen and John MacArthur, amongst others who quite often write as though what they say is authoritative even if what is written is neither from Scripture or Sacred Tradition.

Again, if you have a good hard look at what is written and by different posters (though some posters are the same person) you can see a trend in the accusations and statements of those who claim to be Biblical Christians.

They make multiple claims that are supposed to support their claim to being the successors of the original chrisitans, yet they accept doctrines that were considered heresy by the early church fathers.

What is lacking in their attempts to claim themselves as historical is a general lack of consistency in doctrines.

Can you guess which groups lay claim to St. Patrick besides the Catholics?

Maggie

Which other groups lay claim to St. Patrich?

Peace

 

[MaggieOH]

dennisknapp:

Which other groups lay claim to St. Patrich?

Peace

I have seen it from the Baptists and the Seventh Day Adventists. It has been a while since I searched out the information. From memory they laid claim to St. Patrick by claiming that he belonged to the … wait for it… Church of Ireland… and therefore was not a Catholic Bishop. Go figure.

I found this link for you:

reformedreader.org/history/patrick.htm

Maggie

 

[oudave]

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

Hi Dennis
I appreciate the invite to this thread, I will try to explain why some Bible Christians feel this way, I cant speek for everyone. I feel that thru the history of the church man has changed and added things to the belief system of the church. I did a word search in a Bible program I have on tradition, and in all but one verse it warns against upholding the traditions of man before God. Alot of us also feel that you worship Mary and many Saints, my Mother inlaw was told to bury a statue of a peticular Saint to help her sell her house. I think the Castholic church removing the second commandment from the CCC helps further this belief. We also feel that the wrote and repetitious prayer takes on less meaning than that of a prayer from the heart. I feel that your method of penance is way off the mark and does not lead to repentance.
I think that the form of leadership in the Catholic church is a perfect example of mans desire to be highly reguarded, revered, honored and even praised, and I think that is a pride issue.
I believe that if Christ would have wanted us to believe that in communion it is actualy his body and blood that he would have torn off a piece of skin and bled into a cup, but he didnt . Christ took BREAD and broke it and gave thanks and said take this, this is my body. Bible Christians believe that by going back to the Bible and following the scriptures is more like the church Christ intended.
This is just my opinion and I hope to have not offended anyone.
Dave.

 

[briand]

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

So, let’s see how this logic plays out, shall we.

1. Early Christian were more like the “Bible” Christians of today, then the Roman Catholic Church.
2. We have historical records of these early Christian by way of pagans, Jews and the early Christians themselves.
3. In the historical records is revealed what early Christians thought, believed and practiced.
4. In the historical records it reveals what the early Christians thought, believed and practiced are in line with Roman Catholic Teaching.
5. Therefore, premise 1 is false.

Any thoughts?

Peace

when I was a “bible christian” history was not talked about because it was totally irrelevant. Catholics, orthodox, lutherans, pentecostals etc were all going to go straight to hell with no chance of mercy what so ever. Maybe a very very very few might be snatched from the flames but not to many. In fact 99% of all the people who ever lived might be saved, maybe. One thing was for sure, we were saved and that is all that mattered. It was never really spewed out like that but that was the honest translation. Along with other truly sick stuff.

Personally I think it all failed a long time ago and we are all winging it. I watched a movie about Father Damion, He was about as Catholic as one could get. He lived heaven on this earth and then went home to his master. The problem is in my faith community is that all are works are worthless rags cant save us etc. I dont want my works to save me, I just want to do the work of God, that was usually met with a shutter because I might be works rightousness. I one time yelled “I DONT WANT GOD TO REWARD ME, I JUST WANT TO BE A DECENT SERVENT OF GOD”. I was reminded that I cant be saved bla bla bla reprobate bla bla bla

 

[Benadam]

oudave:

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

Hi Dennis
I appreciate the invite to this thread, I will try to explain why some Bible Christians feel this way, I cant speek for everyone. I feel that thru the history of the church man has changed and added things to the belief system of the church. I did a word search in a Bible program I have on tradition, and in all but one verse it warns against upholding the traditions of man before God. Alot of us also feel that you worship Mary and many Saints, my Mother inlaw was told to bury a statue of a peticular Saint to help her sell her house. I think the Castholic church removing the second commandment from the CCC helps further this belief. We also feel that the wrote and repetitious prayer takes on less meaning than that of a prayer from the heart. I feel that your method of penance is way off the mark and does not lead to repentance.
I think that the form of leadership in the Catholic church is a perfect example of mans desire to be highly reguarded, revered, honored and even praised, and I think that is a pride issue.
I believe that if Christ would have wanted us to believe that in communion it is actualy his body and blood that he would have torn off a piece of skin and bled into a cup, but he didnt . Christ took BREAD and broke it and gave thanks and said take this, this is my body. Bible Christians believe that by going back to the Bible and following the scriptures is more like the church Christ intended.
This is just my opinion and I hope to have not offended anyone.
Dave.

Dear Oudave,

from a Catholic perspective it would be impossible to make the conclusions you arrive at for disclaiming the Catholic Church as the Church described in the bible.

Without the connections offered by a tradition supplemented by the human conduit offered by the laying of of hands it would be impossible for any group to authenticate what the Holy Spirit is revealing to comfort and save modern man. I mean this in reference to the needs that are particular to the various paradigms of consciousness man finds himself in during his journey towards the end.

I’m familiar with attempts at resurrecting pagan religions that have lost the connection offered by a tradition. They are an adulterated spirituality at best and can hardly approach a manifestation of the spirit that would be expressed without the loss of the tradition that linked it to it’s foundation. A tradition is the lifeline of a spirits will on earth. Not that the Trinity is limited in this way but it is a reality denied that the Catholic Church offers

From a spiritual perspective anyone trying to express the Holy Spirits response to the world of today without at least the connection of a tradition linked to the foundation of His work is mislead about the nature of the Spirit. Christ said that the works of the Spirit are like the wind, no one knows where it comes from or where it’s going. How can anyone predict what it would be doing today without the authenticity offered by the very things protestants reject?

 

[dennisknapp]

oudave:

“Bible” Christians claim that their Church is MORE like the early Church then say the Roman Catholic Church, correct? (And by early Church I mean 33 to 315 A.D.)

Hi Dennis
I appreciate the invite to this thread, I will try to explain why some Bible Christians feel this way, I cant speek for everyone. I feel that thru the history of the church man has changed and added things to the belief system of the church. I did a word search in a Bible program I have on tradition, and in all but one verse it warns against upholding the traditions of man before God. Alot of us also feel that you worship Mary and many Saints, my Mother inlaw was told to bury a statue of a peticular Saint to help her sell her house. I think the Castholic church removing the second commandment from the CCC helps further this belief. We also feel that the wrote and repetitious prayer takes on less meaning than that of a prayer from the heart. I feel that your method of penance is way off the mark and does not lead to repentance.
I think that the form of leadership in the Catholic church is a perfect example of mans desire to be highly reguarded, revered, honored and even praised, and I think that is a pride issue.
I believe that if Christ would have wanted us to believe that in communion it is actualy his body and blood that he would have torn off a piece of skin and bled into a cup, but he didnt . Christ took BREAD and broke it and gave thanks and said take this, this is my body. Bible Christians believe that by going back to the Bible and following the scriptures is more like the church Christ intended.
This is just my opinion and I hope to have not offended anyone.
Dave.

What about premise 4 of my argument? Is it false? Can you show that it is?

What do you make of the fact that no one held your view of the Eucharist or baptism until fairly resently in history? To me this would bring up some major red-flags. Why does it not for you?

You say that “thru the history of the church man has changed and added things to the belief system of the church.” How do you know that you are not doing the same thing in your belief system? Is not the whole testamony of Christian history against you?

Peace