J
jakasaki
Guest
Me angry… NO…!!!
Just confused & disappointed that we cannot communicate, that’s all…!
Like I said - whatever translator you are using… ( if you are using one ) is not properly translating your replies.
How are Mormons, Muslims and non-Catholic Protestant Christians really that different?
- Status
Just confused & disappointed that we cannot communicate, that’s all…!
Like I said - whatever translator you are using… ( if you are using one ) is not properly translating your replies.
S
saeedm
Guest
Thanks
No, i’m not using… I have just several dictionary in the my mobile phone and lap top.
(I must exercise grammar… Becom better soon)
God bless
J
jakasaki
Guest
Try google translate - it does a pretty good job.Thanks
No, i’m not using… I have just several dictionary in the my mobile phone and lap top.
(I must exercise grammar… Becom better soon)
God bless
H
hn160
Guest
As a Lutheran, we do not consider ourselves a denomination. This is a posting from Pastor William Weedom:
A Cross-Posting
from ALPB. This seemed to have generated some response and a number of folks said it was helpful. Figured I’d post it here as well:
I’m not sure it will clarify or not, but for what it’s worth. We in the LCMS do not accept denominationalism. We do not believe in the branch theory of the Church. We recognize that our practice of closed communion is exactly what would be appropriate for the entire visible Church on earth. We believe that what we believe is precisely what every jurisdiction/communion SHOULD believe, because it is - we hold - nothing other than what the Scriptures teach.
In other words, we don’t regard those who hold to a different Confession as just “another denomination.” We regard the other confessions to the extent they differ from ours to be falsifications of the truth. As offensive and prideful as they may sound, it’s not intended to be anything less than what (until very recent times) EVERYONE believed about their own confession.
So we act in our communion discipline as if we were the legitimate heir and successor to the Catholic Church of the West. That’s a self-understanding derived from our Lutheran Symbols. We do not claim to be the only jurisdiction in this Catholic Church of the West, purified by the Gospel. We recognize other particular churches around the globe in whom the same faith resides - from the churches of the Archbishop of Latvia, to the churches of the Archbishop of Kenya and the Bishop of Southern Africa and the President of the LCC, and a bunch of others. Consequently the notion that our altars are closed to non Missourians is actually not at all accurate.
In the corrupted state of the Church in which doctrine that we cannot but regard as false and dangerous is enshrined in the confessions of other jurisdictions, this leads invariably to acknowledging in them that while members of the Church Catholic may well reside in their midst (in fact, most certainly DO), nonetheless those Churches by the acceptance of various falsehoods alongside the truth of God, cannot be acknowledged as true sister churches on a par with our Synod. Again, I know it sounds horrific to the ears of those who think denominationally, but if you think confessionally it makes perfect sense: confessions can be entirely pure, somewhat corrupted, or totally destructive of the Christian faith. We tend to put almost all the other confessions (Anglican, Reformed, Roman, Orthodox) as “somewhat corrupted.” Totally destructive would be something like a Mormon or JW confession.
So back to the assumption that an LCMS person holds the pure confession - that IS the assumption we would make, unless the person in question gives evidence that his participation at our altars is in fact a lie - that he disagrees with our Lutheran confession of the Christian faith as expressed in our Lutheran Symbols.
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
Hello hn160,
I don’t believe that it is “offensive and prideful”. However, I do believe though that ignores historical facts, including the fact that there actually was a Protestant Reformation and that there are Protestant men, founders of various denominations, including yours that can actually be identified. Additionally, the fact that your church (denomination) uses a Catholic book, the Bible and hold to beliefs and sacraments that all came out of Catholicism, prove that it branched from Catholicism, does it not?
I believe that denominations who feel it necessary to even go through this exercise and teach things like, “we’re not a denomination”, do so, because when it comes down to religious beliefs there is always that issue of “authority” and that’s a tough issue to get around.
Therefore, it’s easier to ignore Christian History (Christian Traditions) than it is to try to properly explain things like "authority, apostolic succession, sacraments and so on. You see, when ninety percent of your beliefs originate as Catholic beliefs, it hard to explain how the Catholic Church had the authority to get those things, that you agree with right and yet, disagree with those other things that you don’t.
In other words “having God on your terms”. You can’t connect the Christian dots, without first connecting the Catholic dots and you can’t make up your own version of Christian history, just to suit your particular denomination. It’s just another example, of 36,000 other examples of attempting to re-invent Christianity.
Where does your Church (denomination) for example, derive it’s authority to claim that - "almost all the other confessions (Anglican, Reformed, Roman, Orthodox) (are) “somewhat corrupted.” Which man came up with that? And it was a man. What are the sources for this individual’s beliefs that you now share?
This is just one more reason of why I’m glad I’m Catholic. I don’t need to use semantics and go through all of the mental and verbal gymnastics, or reject Christian History (Christian Traditions) to try to understand or explain my Catholic faith.
Thank you for your post.
Your Thoughts?
J
jakasaki
Guest
Saeed:
Listen up my friend and try to follow this.
You posted:
And then 1HolyCatholic posted this:
places Moses and the Samaratins together even though the Samaratins did not exist until long after Moses’ death.
Swing and a miss for the Koran. One strike and a religion of the book is out. Game over for Islam.
He is telling you that the sura/ayah 20:85-90 places the Samaritans in Moses time. The Samariatans did not exist during Moses time. So how can the koran state Moses & Samaritans.
So, here lies the conflict - the koran is wrong with Sura 20:85-90
Saeed:
1HolyCatholic did bring proof as I just reposted the converstations.
In conclusion, 20:85-90 is wrong on all levels, therefore there is a discrepancy within the koran.
[/quote]
A
AbuAbdullah
Guest
Islam is the only non-christian faith which believes in Jesus pbuh:
And God will judge between us.
Amazing, dont you think?
- his miracle birth
- that God has sent him(just like bible says) as prophet and messenger.
- that he is sent to the lost sheeps of Bani Israel.
- Messiah
- he will return at the end of times to kill anti-christ
And God will judge between us.
Amazing, dont you think?
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Heaven will be full of surprises…
Best not to condemn…Christianity as the fulfillment of Judaism is tremendous…the hermeneutics…how the Holy Spirit at Pentecost gave new meaning and fulfillment to all the past in salvation history.
Essentially, through Christ, the Sacred Scriptures are now Logos…the Living Word of God concretized in Jesus Christ…where God – Who can do anything…chose to reveal Himself as Man to become the atonement for sin…but even more so…for new life in Him…
Christ’s kingdom is within…He wishes His will to reign here on earth as it is in heaven.
Best not to condemn…Christianity as the fulfillment of Judaism is tremendous…the hermeneutics…how the Holy Spirit at Pentecost gave new meaning and fulfillment to all the past in salvation history.
Essentially, through Christ, the Sacred Scriptures are now Logos…the Living Word of God concretized in Jesus Christ…where God – Who can do anything…chose to reveal Himself as Man to become the atonement for sin…but even more so…for new life in Him…
Christ’s kingdom is within…He wishes His will to reign here on earth as it is in heaven.
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
C
Contarini
Guest
1
104nn01
Guest
"I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
We say this every Sunday. They do not. "
This is not true. Lutherans say this every sunday in Church. Most of the old symbols are the same.
The thread-starter seems to have a strage view on the other limbs of the church. KJV of the Bible for example, is not another book as the Qu’ran and Mormons Book are. It is simply an english translation of the Septuagint (Greek Old testament), which the Vulgata (Latin, catholic, version of the Bible) heavily relied on during its conseption. The Vulgata is not an original text, and by the thread-starters logic, Catholicism and Vulgata is only a copycat of the Greek Orthodox, and perhaps they are copycats of the Oriental Orthodox who trace their heritage to the Jerusalem chruch, which in turn was nothing but a kind of Jewish sect that had accepted Jesus as Messiah.
The question that the world is made up by catholics on the one side, and the rest on the other side, seems absurd to me, knowing these things.
As for Lutherans in particular, Martin Luther never wanted the church to split up, and in his mind, they didn’t. In the Norwegian Church, hardly anything changed upon getting ordered to accept Lutheranism during the reformation. The same priests and bishops held the same positions and continued what they where used to. The only thing that changed in the beginning was that the King got the Church’s land.
All Lutherans have ordained priests by bishops. And Lutherans themselves claim apostolic ordination. It is hard to argue with that in the case of Norway, because the priests and bishops were the same before and after the reformation.
It should also be known that most european Lutheran churches call their clergy by the same titles as the catholic save munks. As such most Lutheran clergy are Priests, and those insisting not to be called priests are mostly influenced by Americans. American Lutherans usually feel the need to distinguish themselves from the catholic clergy.
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
We say this every Sunday. They do not. "
This is not true. Lutherans say this every sunday in Church. Most of the old symbols are the same.
The thread-starter seems to have a strage view on the other limbs of the church. KJV of the Bible for example, is not another book as the Qu’ran and Mormons Book are. It is simply an english translation of the Septuagint (Greek Old testament), which the Vulgata (Latin, catholic, version of the Bible) heavily relied on during its conseption. The Vulgata is not an original text, and by the thread-starters logic, Catholicism and Vulgata is only a copycat of the Greek Orthodox, and perhaps they are copycats of the Oriental Orthodox who trace their heritage to the Jerusalem chruch, which in turn was nothing but a kind of Jewish sect that had accepted Jesus as Messiah.
The question that the world is made up by catholics on the one side, and the rest on the other side, seems absurd to me, knowing these things.
As for Lutherans in particular, Martin Luther never wanted the church to split up, and in his mind, they didn’t. In the Norwegian Church, hardly anything changed upon getting ordered to accept Lutheranism during the reformation. The same priests and bishops held the same positions and continued what they where used to. The only thing that changed in the beginning was that the King got the Church’s land.
All Lutherans have ordained priests by bishops. And Lutherans themselves claim apostolic ordination. It is hard to argue with that in the case of Norway, because the priests and bishops were the same before and after the reformation.
It should also be known that most european Lutheran churches call their clergy by the same titles as the catholic save munks. As such most Lutheran clergy are Priests, and those insisting not to be called priests are mostly influenced by Americans. American Lutherans usually feel the need to distinguish themselves from the catholic clergy.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
They are all united in not be Athiestic.
- Status