How far can one wander from the original Church and still claim to be Christian?

[John_oxios]

=Stillchecking;7919687]Hi John,

Thanks for your posts. I hope you understand that I can’t sit here and comment on all the verses of scripture you site. I do have a life haha, and if I skipped one verse I suppose from someone I would get an ah ha!

Ground rule for me, I will only debate using the bible.

In John 3:5 Jesus says you must be born of water and the spirit, Jesus does not say you must be baptized in that verse. … The water here is the word of God. Jesus didn’t tell Nicodemus to get dunked in the river, come back and I’ll give you the spirit. Jesus is talking about a change of heart and the only place we can find that truth that changes the heart is in the bible.

Hi Stillcheck,
The water here is the Word of God?? How did you come to that conclusion?? In jhn 2, Jesus He blesses & changes the ritual water of purification, into wine. The significance is having no wine biblically there is no Joy in the commnuity/ nation, and when Jesus time comes we will receive Joy in the Spirit through Him by water.
And in John 4 the pharisees are worried about all the people being baptized.

Jhn 4:1 Now when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John

hn 4:13 Jesus said to her, “Every one who drinks of this water will thirst again,
Jhn 4:14 but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst; the water that I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

The Holy Spirit throughout the Bible is represented symbolically by water.

What is Nicodemus doing??? He is coming in the thick of night to speak and to question Jesus, he’s still on the fence, he knows there is something special about Christ… but he’s a pharisee and doesn’t want to be seen with Jesus because of his position. Nicodemus comes out @ Christ burial

Jhn 7:50 Nicodemus (he who came to Jesus by night, being one of them) said to them,

Jhn 19:39 And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds.

Commenatry on Jhn 19:39, David Guzik:

Joseph and Nicodemus served Jesus too late. Not too late to fulfill prophecy, not too late to be of tender service to Jesus. But too late to satisfy their own timid hearts; too late to escape the painful regret of what they might have been and what they might have done for Jesus.

stilcheck,Not you neccessarily John, but it amazes me how frothed the catholic gatekeepers get with someone who claims they are born again outside of the catholic church.

Protestants are still crying about Trent, in which the men forming the Schism and joining it are anathematized from the Church… today after vatican II we do not hold the Children of those people four hundred yrs ago responsible for the faith they were raised in.

Stillcheck, I was born again at age 23, December 5th 1983 at 9:20 in the morning. I was by myself. I had some biblical understanding.
Most all born again christians will tell you it happened to them the same way, that it was a specific time and place. There are millions like me, and no one is going to convince me (or take it away) that it was not real or that it was the work of the devil. I know I am going to heaven and it has nothing to do with baptism, or confirmation, or confession (to a priest) or even the eucharist and all the other man made laws.

Mozoltov!! However it is the reformation that came up with the idea no matter you do, how much you sin, you can’t lose your assurance of salvation…ya threw repentance of sin, or the compensation/ restitution for sin out the door… sin all you want… the holy Spirit got your back?? That’s a real problem Biblically… because God does withdraw His favor til you repent or confess make restitution for such, you separate yourself from God.

It’s been insinuated that I am a Protestant, but that is not the case because that would mean my faith came out of Catholicism. I’ve read on this thread that the catholic church was the only church until the reformation. But that is not true. There was a christian church, made up of all the small churches that maintaned the bible alone would be their guide book. They had no earthly or political might, they had no army, they hid from the self appointed rulers, yet they survived from the time of Christ through the generations to this day, preserving the word of God.

huh? and where is this in the Bible??? Name this these secret society? Because it sounds like you are describing the Church prior to the fourth century, and after Julius (Constantine’s grandson?) who again outlawed and persecuted the Church.

If you want to know Jesus, if you want to be born again, it would help if you give up all that man made stuff and ask Jesus to come into your heart.

if you believe the Catholic Church made it all up, thentake that Bible you’re reading and throw that out also… Because if you believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God, you acknowledge the authority of the Apostolic Catholic Church which kept it and passed it down century to century since Christ, and to deny that is to deny documented History.

God bless,
John

 

[Stillchecking]

Wow, there’s lots to respond to. We have different presuppositions. Your’s is that the catholic church was the only church from the time of Christ to the reformation. You were not there in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc centuries. So you are not giving an eye witness account, but are relying upon what you read and have been told. People being what they are, independent thinkers, towns scattered far and wide, it is not even logical to assume there was only one church to which everyone bended their knee. There most certainly were christians outside the catholic church. Their names given to them by their assailants, they were called Paulicians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Petro Brussians, Albigenses, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists etc. Gee wiz there’s plenty of history that has been written on this subject.

So ya, my faith does not come from Rome or any of the reformed churches. My faith comes from the bible. My faith rejects those extra catholic teaching outside of the bible.

John, you say saved by baptism even sealed by baptism, but Elvisman in an earlier post tells me we can lose our salvation (I will answer these passages cited by Elvisman, at some time, maybe days or weeks). So according to catholicism, baptism saves, but it doesn’t. I don’t know but i’d guess confirmation saves too, but it doesn’t. That is why there’s confession to save, but it doesn’t. I suppose the eucharist saves too, but it doesn’t. That’s why you have the annointing of the dieing, hopefully the priest can get there at your last breath, to save you, but then he leaves, you have an evil thought and the annointing fails also. According to Elvisman, you can lose your salvation. So off to purgatory we go. Back at the graveside service, we’re back to square one where the priest encourages the grieving that we are saved by baptism. Ya funerals are sad for any family, but particulary so for catholics. This is a sad, dark church.

 

[Stillchecking]

Nicea325 asks me to give him one catholic teaching which contradicts the bible.

The most visable one would be in the 10 commandments. Let’s take # 4:
“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them.

Now I believe you’ll find this in the catholic bible, but not in your missal, not in your ccd classrooms, not in your catholic school classrooms, not in your catholic bookstores etc etc. There they have omitted #4 and broke one of the “though shall not covets” into 2, there that makes 10. Holy cow your churches are full of graven images!

Please let me know if you want another contradiction of catholic teaching to the bible.

 

[elvisman]

Wow, there’s lots to respond to. We have different presuppositions. Your’s is that the catholic church was the only church from the time of Christ to the reformation. You were not there in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc centuries. So you are not giving an eye witness account, but are relying upon what you read and have been told. People being what they are, independent thinkers, towns scattered far and wide, it is not even logical to assume there was only one church to which everyone bended their knee. There most certainly were christians outside the catholic church. Their names given to them by their assailants, they were called Paulicians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Petro Brussians, Albigenses, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists etc. Gee wiz there’s plenty of history that has been written on this subject.

Your sense of history is tragically lacking. It’s either an exercise in blatant revisionism or historical ignorance.

**You speak of the early centuries of the Church (2nd, 3rd, 4th) by bringing up heretical sects such as the Waldensians and Abligensians who weren’t even around until the 12th century. The Anabaptists didn’t rear their heads until centuries later - right before the Protestant Revolt. There were other sects who came before that like the Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novationists (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.) which were ALSO heretics. **

Most** of these heretics rejected infant baptism which was held unanimously by the Early Church Fathers who called it the Tradition of the Apostles.**

So ya, my faith does not come from Rome or any of the reformed churches. My faith comes from the bible. My faith rejects those extra catholic teaching outside of the bible.

Another example of what Jesus** DIDN’T**** intend for his Body. He DIDN’T start a system of Lone Ranger Christians – all learning and growing in faith by themselves. He established a Church – HIS BODY****. Heb. 10:24-25**** speaks to this false sense of faith when it tells us that this sort of Lone Ranger Christianity is NOT what Jesus intended.**

 

[elvisman]

cont’d.

Stillchecking:
John, you say saved by baptism even sealed by baptism, but Elvisman in an earlier post tells me we can lose our salvation (I will answer these passages cited by Elvisman, at some time, maybe days or weeks). So according to catholicism, baptism saves, but it doesn’t. I don’t know but i’d guess confirmation saves too, but it doesn’t. That is why there’s confession to save, but it doesn’t. I suppose the eucharist saves too, but it doesn’t. That’s why you have the annointing of the dieing, hopefully the priest can get there at your last breath, to save you, but then he leaves, you have an evil thought and the annointing fails also. According to Elvisman, you can lose your salvation. So off to purgatory we go. Back at the graveside service, we’re back to square one where the priest encourages the grieving that we are saved by baptism. Ya funerals are sad for any family, but particulary so for catholics. This is a sad, dark church
We ARE saved by Baptism, as the Bible tells us (Mark 16:16, 1 Pet. 3:21). However, as with ANY free gift – we can reject it later and turn away, losing that salvation. You have YET to address the dozen or so verses that I provided which tell us this very fact.

**With your comment about Purgatory it is painfully obvious that you haven’t a clue as to what the Catholic Church teaches. It is not for those who have lost their salvation but for those who ****ARE **saved.

Finally, Christ’s Church is anything but sad and dark. Jesus called it “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14-16). What is sad and dark is living in the PARTIAL truth of Protestantism instead of the FULLNESS of truth (Eph. 1:22-23) which is the Catholic Church.

 

[SteveVH]

Wow, there’s lots to respond to. We have different presuppositions. Your’s is that the catholic church was the only church from the time of Christ to the reformation. You were not there in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc centuries. So you are not giving an eye witness account, but are relying upon what you read and have been told.

And you were not there in the civil war. You are relying upon what you read and have been told. Does that mean there may not have been a civil war? We have the benefit of countless witnesses who were there. Have you never read any of the early Church Father’s?

People being what they are, independent thinkers, towns scattered far and wide, it is not even logical to assume there was only one church to which everyone bended their knee.

You are thinking with a 21st century mind. No, there was one Church to which everyone bended their knee. Those that rejected the doctrines of that Church were rightly condemned as heretics.

There most certainly were christians outside the catholic church. Their names given to them by their assailants, they were called Paulicians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Petro Brussians, Albigenses, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists etc. Gee wiz there’s plenty of history that has been written on this subject.

Really. And where are they today? I’ve never seen a Paulician Church, or an Arnoldist Church or a Henrician Church, etc. Where are they? And if they don’t exist, what does that tell you in light of Christ’s promise that the gates of hell would never prevail aganst His Church?

So ya, my faith does not come from Rome or any of the reformed churches. My faith comes from the bible. My faith rejects those extra catholic teaching outside of the bible.

So you are you own interperative authority, your own Pope. You had better hope that you are infallible otherwise you have nothing on which to rely.

John, you say saved by baptism even sealed by baptism, but Elvisman in an earlier post tells me we can lose our salvation (I will answer these passages cited by Elvisman, at some time, maybe days or weeks). So according to catholicism, baptism saves, but it doesn’t. I don’t know but i’d guess confirmation saves too, but it doesn’t. That is why there’s confession to save, but it doesn’t. I suppose the eucharist saves too, but it doesn’t. That’s why you have the annointing of the dieing, hopefully the priest can get there at your last breath, to save you, but then he leaves, you have an evil thought and the annointing fails also. According to Elvisman, you can lose your salvation. So off to purgatory we go. Back at the graveside service, we’re back to square one where the priest encourages the grieving that we are saved by baptism. Ya funerals are sad for any family, but particulary so for catholics. This is a sad, dark church.

On the contrary, we are a Church of light and hope. One enters the Church through baptism “as through a door”. God does not then turn us into robots by doing away with our free will. So yes, we can reject the grace we received through baptism. It is why the Church tells us that missing Mass is a mortal sin. Without the grace of God acting in us and through us on a constant basis, without being fed by the Eucharist and without being forgiven through Reconciliation we are in mortal spirtual danger. Why do you think that Paul worked out his salvation “with fear and trembling”? The doctrine of “once saved, always saved” creates spiritual peril for those who subscribe to it.

 

[John_oxios]

Stillchecking;7933485]Wow, there’s lots to respond to. We have different presuppositions. Your’s is that the catholic church was the only church from the time of Christ to the reformation. You were not there in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc centuries. So you are not giving an eye witness account, but are relying upon what you read and have been told. People being what they are, independent thinkers, towns scattered far and wide, it is not even logical to assume there was only one church to which everyone bended their knee. There most certainly were christians outside the catholic church. Their names given to them by their assailants, they were called Paulicians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Petro Brussians, Albigenses, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists etc. Gee wiz there’s plenty of history that has been written on this subject.

Hi stillcheck,
And wowwwww, there’s a lot of gossip and innuendo you use to reply too.

The History is they're not Christian, check again.  They use to be called heresy's and heretics and still are except the non-Catholics have raised them to New historical prominence.

To be Christian, is to believe/confess that Jesus is God’s Word made Flesh: You really need to look things up prior to using them as ‘proof’

[Contempt is hating something prior to investigation… and that in my book is Sin.
No one is saying there weren’t other church’s with other beliefs but they were not Christian by the very definition. You haven’t investigated the Roman Catholic Church, you believe without your own investigation, but rely on what you have heard about it from biased parties… yet you come into our community and tell us we are doing it all wrong? You know and only believe the stories told by non-Catholics.]

In the 2nd third centuries even in the first Century yes there were groups claiming to be Christian but not of Christ, Johns Gospel was written in defense of Christ as God in the flesh against Gnosticsm. and then there were the Judaizers who insisted on following Jewish law to be Christian. Most if not all of Pauls letters to the Church are against false teachings from people coming into the communities and preaching another Christ.

ooooo… this is a very good example
Paulicans (not named after the apostle)

Paulicans, 650 a.d and 872 a.d in Armenia were a Christian Adoptionist sect and militarized revolt movement, also accused by medieval sources as Gnostic and** quasi **Manichaean Christian. They flourished between 650 and 872 in Armenia and the Eastern Themes of the Byzantine Empire. According to medieval Byzantine sources, the group’s name was derived after the third century Bishop of Antioch, Paul of Samosata.[2][3]

Quasi: resembling/ seeming

Adoptionism, sometimes called dynamic monarchianism, i**s a minority Christian belief **that Jesus was adopted as God’s son (Son of God) at his baptism.
The reverence for the Cross they looked upon as heathenish. The outward administration of the sacraments of the Lord’s Supper and baptism they rejected.

while they maybe far out at least they believed we are saved by Christ’s Baptism.
did he say minority Christian belief??? that’s not christian at all!

But if this is from whence you congregation stems from, so be it. It’s not Christian and it’s certainly not Catholic.

Augustine was Manichean before he discovered the Truth

Manichæism is a religion founded by the Persian Mani in the latter half of the third century. It purported to be the true synthesis of all the religious systems then known, and actually consisted of Zoroastrian Dualism, ... As the theory of two eternal principles, good and evil, ... It would therefore mean "the illustrious

I love this example Anabaptists before the Reformation??? they were formed after the reformation 16th century and these followed in their steps…but all were break-offs of the Roman Church
Baptists, Quakers, Methodists, Moravians, and others…

More than four centuries ago in Zurich, Switzerland, a new fellowship of Christian believers was formed. Martin Luther had separated himself from it but had continued the practice of infant baptism. Ulrich Zwingli also had separated from Romanism, but continued to grant to the political rulers the right to decide the policies and practices of the church.

Arnoldisits: ‘Bogolism’ It may have originated in a form of Manichaen belief, itself a melange of Persian Zoroastrianism and early Christian Gnostic dualism (they often retained early Christian beliefs and practices that other strands of Christianity abandoned).

These people lived in some isolated valley in France, As Walter Mapp writing around 1182 says:
“Everywhere among Christians they have lain hidden since the time of the Lord’s Passion, straying in error.”

There’s a community I want to use as my Communities historical beginnings ]

So ya, my faith does not come from Rome or any of the reformed churches. My faith comes from the bible. My faith rejects those extra catholic teaching outside of the bible

They weren’t extra!!! in fact Biblically based and practiced, But Luther removed six books from the Bible which went against his theology, James and Hebrews he also threw out… but his constituents talked him out of it.
Hardly, the bible tells us man’s history with God/ our Mistakes and how we overcame them… Faith comes by Hearing… someone taught you what they believed and what it has done for them… it’s called ’ Witness’Without witness there’d be no bible at all. Your Bible come through the Authority Of Jesus Christ through His Living witness the Catholic Church. Before the Bible was the Catholic Church whom Jesus sent with all the authority of Heaven to be here when he returns.

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

Hi John,

Thanks for your posts. I hope you understand that I can’t sit here and comment on all the verses of scripture you site. I do have a life haha, and if I skipped one verse I suppose from someone I would get an ah ha!

God Bless.

Hi stillcheck,
It seems you can find the time to post reasonable response to the scriptures which back up Baptism infant or not… you can find the time to find to post excuses for your self interpreting opinion. you’ll blurt it out but not interested in our response??

No response on my response to your pretexts against Baptism:

Stilllcheck " If baptism saves, why did Paul write:

1 Cor 1:17 "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel…

1 Cor 1:14 "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius

Wisdom is knowledge used rightly
Pro 2:9 Then you will understand righteousness and justice and equity, every good path;
:10 for wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul;

but the way you interpret scripture is far from it’s meaning. It’s almost laughable, but sad nonetheless.

God bless,
John