How do I choose a Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter runandsew
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is precisely the problem with protestantism. We can’t rely on our own minds or comfort levels to inerrantly determine truth - especially supernatural truth. Scripture tells us - Rely not on your own understanding. Christ promised that the Holy Spirit would guide us in all truth. Does “all truth” include religious truth? Of course. Our God is a God of order and unity, not a God of chaos and division. The umpteen thousand protestant denominations are a woeful monument to division and schism. This is not the will of the Holy Spirit.

God Bless.
True, but ultimately you have to be convinced in your own mind that you are worshipping at the right place. I assume you are Catholic? Do you believe you are worshipping in the right place? Of course you do. Now, let’s say that for whatever reason you become utterly convinced that you are not in the right church, are you going to stay? Probably not, unless family considerations override. You would not stay because (in my example only of course) you have become convinced that the Church is wrong…so you need to look elsewhere. We can talk all we want about authority and the work of the Holy Spirit, but in the end we need to be convinced by the Holy Spirit (through reason, revelation, scripture, whatever) that we are in the right place.
 
True, but ultimately you have to be convinced in your own mind that you are worshipping at the right place. I assume you are Catholic? Do you believe you are worshipping in the right place? Of course you do. Now, let’s say that for whatever reason you become utterly convinced that you are not in the right church, are you going to stay? Probably not, unless family considerations override. You would not stay because (in my example only of course) you have become convinced that the Church is wrong…so you need to look elsewhere. We can talk all we want about authority and the work of the Holy Spirit, but in the end we need to be convinced by the Holy Spirit (through reason, revelation, scripture, whatever) that we are in the right place.
:yup: 👍 :amen:
 
True, but ultimately you have to be convinced in your own mind that you are worshipping at the right place. I assume you are Catholic? Do you believe you are worshipping in the right place? Of course you do. Now, let’s say that for whatever reason you become utterly convinced that you are not in the right church, are you going to stay? Probably not, unless family considerations override. You would not stay because (in my example only of course) you have become convinced that the Church is wrong…so you need to look elsewhere. We can talk all we want about authority and the work of the Holy Spirit, but in the end we need to be convinced by the Holy Spirit (through reason, revelation, scripture, whatever) that we are in the right place.
Unless…! this is a deception to get you to leave your catholic church with the promise of newer and better things and music and fun oh my.God’s promises are good to the faithfull so I opt for faithfullness to the cc. dessert
 
They were written by a bunch of Jews though. There were no “Gentiles” who wrote any of it that I know of.

zerinus
Luke is a Gentile, a Greek. He wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.

Mark, Matthew, and John are all apostles of Jesus. So your statement that no Gentile wrote the NT is incorrect.

Here is a biography of Luke.
Luke, the writer of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, has been identified with St. Paul’s “Luke, the beloved physician” (Colossians 4:14). We know few other facts about Luke’s life from Scripture and from early Church historians.
It is believed that Luke was born a Greek and a Gentile. In Colossians 10-14 speaks of those friends who are with him. He first mentions all those “of the circumcision” – in other words, Jews – and he does not include Luke in this group. Luke’s gospel shows special sensitivity to evangelizing Gentiles. It is only in his gospel that we hear the parable of the Good Samaritan, that we hear Jesus praising the faith of Gentiles such as the widow of Zarephath and Naaman the Syrian (Lk.4:25-27), and that we hear the story of the one grateful leper who is a Samaritan (Lk.17:11-19). According to the early Church historian Eusebius Luke was born at Antioch in Syria.
 
🙂 The church is wrong? Pleasssssse explain how are YOU judging thissssss! dessert
 
🙂 Reason revelation scripture … ! WHATEVER?
What is whatever? What ever turns you on? dessert
 
Dessert,
You believe the Catholic Church to be the depository of truth. That’s fine. You should remain in the Church. Not everyone has the same belief though. For those of us who are non-Catholics, and who care about our faith, we are not going to convert to the Catholic faith unless we are convinced that it is true. Seeing others say that it is true is not enough because, in our hearts, we must be convinced because it is we who would be converting. This would be true also of anyone who considers converting from the Catholic faith to a non-Catholic faith. They would be very unlikely to do so unless, in their heart, they become convinced that the Catholic faith is not true. That is all that I am trying to say here.
RR1213
 
That is precisely why I am not a Catholic. Where are your prophets and Apostles? Where are your revelations? Where is your open canon of scripture?

zerinus
Well, let’s see

We have the greatest prophet… Jesus…

you have the false prophet J Smith…

We have all the Apostles… who must meet the criteria of actually seeing and learning from Jesus Himself.

you have self-proclaimed apostles

We have the promise of Heaven and eternity with the One God available to us…

you have the silly chance to be a god of your own planet.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_4_167.gif

%between%
 
If I were to leave the Catholic Church for a “bible believing” church, how would I choose one?
Well, I didn’t join a “bible believing” only Church, but I did leave the Catholic Church for a Protestant one. How did I choose? I understood the tenets of Catholicism that I was in disagreement with, and which ones I was in agreement with (most). So I had an understanding of what I believed and found a Church that affirmed the same things.

In my case, I needed the Real Presence, Our Lady, the 7 Sacraments, the Nicene creed… There are few Protestant Churches where I could find this belief. I found the Episcopal Church and started attending. When I found that the Mass may as well have come out of the same Missal from the Catholic Church I was sure I had come home.

But if you’re happy with Catholicism, stay there.
 
Well, I didn’t join a “bible believing” only Church, but I did leave the Catholic Church for a Protestant one. How did I choose? I understood the tenets of Catholicism that I was in disagreement with, and which ones I was in agreement with (most). So I had an understanding of what I believed and found a Church that affirmed the same things.

In my case,** I needed the Real Presence, Our Lady, the 7 Sacraments, the Nicene creed**… There are few Protestant Churches where I could find this belief. I found the Episcopal Church and started attending. When I found that the Mass may as well have come out of the same Missal from the Catholic Church I was sure I had come home.

But if you’re happy with Catholicism, stay there.
If you have a different conception of the Real Presence from what He really is…
If you have a different and limited devotion to Mary,…
If you have sacraments limited to Baptism, and Marriage, (and a lesser version of the Last Rites and Confirmation)…

then perhaps you have satisfied your needs.

But there is no way you have the Eucharist and Ordination as Jesus conferred in the Catholic Church.

As for the Creed

"…I believe in Jesus Christ His only begotten Son…) means a lot more that believing that He exists. The fullness of the Truth (Jesus) can only be found in the Church which Truth founded.
 
Luke is a Gentile, a Greek. He wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.

Mark, Matthew, and John are all apostles of Jesus. So your statement that no Gentile wrote the NT is incorrect.

Here is a biography of Luke.
Luke didn’t write any scriptures. He made an abridgment of larger records of sacred texts that existed at that time, which he had access to; the originals of which have since perished. He says that himself:

Luke 1:

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

All of the four Gospels are in fact abridgments of larger works the originals of which have not survived, including the great Gospel of John. The complier of the Gospel of John again makes that clear in the book:

John 19:

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

“He that saw . . .” was John, not the person who compiled (or abridged) the Gospel of John. There are more interjections made by the compiler or editor of the Gospel of John, proving that it is an abridgement, not the original account:

John 20:

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

31 But these {i.e. smaller account} are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

John 21:

24 This {i.e. John} is the disciple which testifieth of these things {i.e. what the editor has written}, and wrote these things: and we {i.e. the editor} know that his testimony is true.

25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written {i.e. implying that he has made an abridgement of the original Gospel of John, not the full account}. Amen.

The original sacred scriptures were all written by “Jews” (the Apostles actually), the originals of none of which in fact have survived. What we have is only a small abridgement of what any of them wrote.

zerinus
 
Luke is a Gentile, a Greek. He wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.

Mark, Matthew, and John are all apostles of Jesus. So your statement that no Gentile wrote the NT is incorrect.

Here is a biography of Luke.
Mark, Matthew, and John were Jews who accepted Jesus as the Messiah, and were later known as Christians.
 
Luke didn’t write any scriptures. He made an abridgment of larger records of sacred texts that existed at that time, which he had access to; the originals of which have since perished. He says that himself:

Have you not read my writing carefully? St. Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts. He wrote it with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

So he wrote two of the NT text. I did not say he wrote the whole Scripture.

To say that he didn’t write any is mistaken. If he didn’t write it, then who wrote the Gospel of Luke? Luke was taught by Paul, the Apostle for the Gentile. To make a general statement that Luke didn’t write any scripture is INCORRECT.

He wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.
 
Mark, Matthew, and John were Jews who accepted Jesus as the Messiah, and were later known as Christians.
Yes, they are Jewish. Of the 4 Gospels, Matthew, Mark, John and Luke. Luke is the only Gentile (Christian convert) who write Gospel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top