I am Apostolic, you can't be Apostolic, Why I cant be Protestant

[CopticChristian]

It feels like your goading others or making fun of other Christians who are not Catholic, just because you are

So that we can discuss your contention in the same context provide me evidence by statement and your understanding of

Goading
Making fun

So that I may clarify what my intentions are and you can have understanding

When you say feel, this causes me to wonder if what you are writing is an emotional response or a belief or an inference.

 

[LinuxUser]

So that we can discuss your contention in the same context provide me evidence by statement and your understanding of

Goading
Making fun

So that I may clarify what my intentions are and you can have understanding

When you say feel, this causes me to wonder if what you are writing is an emotional response or a belief or an inference.

All the threads you started, there is your example. I am of the mind that you could be trolling the way you are showing disdain in your OP’s toward other Christian groups.

 

[tjt3]

“Wherever two or more are gathered in my name, I am.” Many paths to Christ. To each his own. He taught us through the Gospels everything we need to know. The Holy Spirit moves where the Holy Spirit wills. Pax

 

[CopticChristian]

All the threads you started, there is your example. I am of the mind that you could be trolling the way you are showing disdain in your OP’s toward other Christian groups.

I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
I believe in Intrinsic Justification
The Church is The Family of God

I see posts about converts/reverts. I see no goading or whatever it is you believe. I see no disdain. I understand you don’t like what I write. Ask me a specific question and I will give you a specific answer.

 

[CopticChristian]

“Wherever two or more are gathered in my name, I am.” Many paths to Christ. To each his own. He taught us through the Gospels everything we need to know. The Holy Spirit moves where the Holy Spirit wills. Pax

That is one way of looking at it.

 

[LinuxUser]

I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
I believe in Intrinsic Justification
The Church is The Family of God

I see posts about converts/reverts. I see no goading or whatever it is you believe. I see no disdain. I understand you don’t like what I write. Ask me a specific question and I will give you a specific answer.

What you write is a disgrace to Christian unity. Seems like your a sede so I shall have no dealings with the likes of you

 

[CopticChristian]

What you write is a disgrace to Christian unity. Seems like your a sede so I shall have no dealings with the likes of you

I would only add in your opinion.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Which Apostles do you believe founded other than Churches as described? I would be interested to know.

Well,

We start by defining Apostle and Disciple:

Apostle: The term apostle is derived from Koine Greek ἀπόστολος (apóstolos), meaning one who is sent forth as a messenger[1][2] in contrast to a disciple who is a “student” that learns from a “teacher”.

In that regard, Isaiah, Ezequiel, etc were an Apostle.

Luke 10 refers to 72 apostles appointed by Jesus. Later we have Paul, Stephen, etc, etc.

Perhaps this article from wikipedia can help in this regard:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventy_Disciples

Irenaeus dismissed listing all the different churches at the time as tedious.

One of the lists from the article:

The First List of the Seventy and Other Lists
P christianity.svg Christianity portal

The Seventy Apostles of Christ were chosen in addition to the Twelve Disciples. Their number eventually surpassed Seventy, nevertheless- they still kept “the Seventy” as their number. However, the names of the original seventy are unknown, as is showed in the Gospel of John: “…many of His disciples went back, and walked with Him no more. Then said Jesus to the Twelve, Do you also want to go away?” (John 6:66-67)

Many of the names included among the Seventy are recognizable for their other achievements. The names included in various lists differ slightly. In the lists Luke is also one of these seventy himself. The following list gives a widely accepted canon.[citation needed] Their names are listed below, along with the areas of the Bible in which they can be viewed:

James "the Lord's brother", author of the Epistle of James, and first Bishop of Jerusalem (sometimes is replaced by Jacob Joses Justus, who was also a brother of Jesus, since James the Just is identified as one of the Twelve Apostles) Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3, Acts 12:17, 15:13; Epistle of James.
Agabus. Reference to in Acts 11:28; 21:10.
Amplias. Reference to in Romans 16:8
Mark the Evangelist, author of the Gospel of Mark and Bishop of Alexandria
Luke the Evangelist, author of the Gospel of Luke
Cleopas
Simeon, son of Cleopas, 2nd Bishop of Jerusalem
Barnabas, companion of Paul
Justus, Bishop of Eleutheropolis
Thaddeus of Edessa (not the Apostle called Thaddeus) also known as Saint Addai
Ananias, Bishop of Damascus
Stephen, one of the Seven Deacons, the first martyr
Philip the Evangelist, one of the Seven Deacons, Bishop of Tralles in Asia Minor
Prochorus, one of the Seven Deacons, Bishop of Nicomedia in Bithynia
Nicanor the Deacon, one of the Seven Deacons
Timon, one of the Seven Deacons
Parmenas the Deacon, one of the Seven Deacons
Timothy, Bishop of Ephesus
Titus, Bishop of Crete
Philemon, Bishop of Gaza
Onesimus (Not the Onesimus mentioned in the Epistle to Philemon)
Epaphras, Bishop of Andriaca
Archippus
Silas, Bishop of Corinth
Silvanus
Crescens
Crispus, Bishop of Chalcedon in Galilee
Epenetus, Bishop of Carthage
Andronicus, Bishop of Pannonia
Stachys, Bishop of Byzantium
Amplias, Bishop of Odissa (Odessus)
Urban, Bishop of Macedonia
Narcissus, Bishop of Athens
Apelles, Bishop of Heraklion
Aristobulus, Bishop of Britain
Herodion, Bishop of Patras
Agabus the Prophet
Rufus, Bishop of Thebes
Asyncritus, Bishop of Hyrcania
Phlegon, Bishop of Marathon
Hermes, Bishop of Philippopolis
Parrobus, Bishop of Pottole
Hermas, Bishop of Dalmatia
Pope Linus, Bishop of Rome
Gaius, Bishop of Ephesus
Philologus, Bishop of Sinope
Lucius of Cyrene, Bishop of Laodicea in Syria
Jason, Bishop of Tarsus
Sosipater, Bishop of Iconium
Olympas
Tertius, transcriber of the Epistle to the Romans and Bishop of Iconium
Erastus, Bishop of Paneas
Quartus, Bishop of Berytus
Euodias, Bishop of Antioch
Onesiphorus, Bishop of Cyrene
Clement, Bishop of Sardis
Sosthenes, Bishop of Colophon
Apollos, Bishop of Caesarea
Tychicus, Bishop of Colophon
Epaphroditus
Carpus, Bishop of Beroea in Thrace
Quadratus
John Mark (commonly considered identical to Mark the Evangelist), bishop of Byblos[7]
Zenas the Lawyer, Bishop of Diospolis
Aristarchus, Bishop of Apamea in Syria
Pudens
Trophimus
Mark, Bishop of Apollonia[disambiguation needed]
Artemas, Bishop of Lystra
Aquila
Fortunatus
Achaicus 1 Corinthians 16:17
Tabitha, a woman disciple, whom Peter raised from the dead

Now that is a lot of Bishops and Churches in my book.

 

[CopticChristian]

Well,

We start by defining Apostle and Disciple:

In that regard, Isaiah, Ezequiel, etc were an Apostle.

Luke 10 refers to 72 apostles appointed by Jesus. Later we have Paul, Stephen, etc, etc.

Perhaps this article from wikipedia can help in this regard:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventy_Disciples

Irenaeus dismissed listing all the different churches at the time as tedious.

One of the lists from the article:

The First List of the Seventy and Other Lists
P christianity.svg Christianity portal

The Seventy Apostles of Christ were chosen in addition to the Twelve Disciples. Their number eventually surpassed Seventy, nevertheless- they still kept “the Seventy” as their number. However, the names of the original seventy are unknown, as is showed in the Gospel of John: “…many of His disciples went back, and walked with Him no more. Then said Jesus to the Twelve, Do you also want to go away?” (John 6:66-67)

Many of the names included among the Seventy are recognizable for their other achievements. The names included in various lists differ slightly. In the lists Luke is also one of these seventy himself. The following list gives a widely accepted canon.[citation needed] Their names are listed below, along with the areas of the Bible in which they can be viewed:

James "the Lord's brother", author of the Epistle of James, and first Bishop of Jerusalem (sometimes is replaced by Jacob Joses Justus, who was also a brother of Jesus, since James the Just is identified as one of the Twelve Apostles) Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3, Acts 12:17, 15:13; Epistle of James.
Agabus. Reference to in Acts 11:28; 21:10.
Amplias. Reference to in Romans 16:8
Mark the Evangelist, author of the Gospel of Mark and Bishop of Alexandria
Luke the Evangelist, author of the Gospel of Luke
Cleopas
Simeon, son of Cleopas, 2nd Bishop of Jerusalem
Barnabas, companion of Paul
Justus, Bishop of Eleutheropolis
Thaddeus of Edessa (not the Apostle called Thaddeus) also known as Saint Addai
Ananias, Bishop of Damascus
Stephen, one of the Seven Deacons, the first martyr
Philip the Evangelist, one of the Seven Deacons, Bishop of Tralles in Asia Minor
Prochorus, one of the Seven Deacons, Bishop of Nicomedia in Bithynia
Nicanor the Deacon, one of the Seven Deacons
Timon, one of the Seven Deacons
Parmenas the Deacon, one of the Seven Deacons
Timothy, Bishop of Ephesus
Titus, Bishop of Crete
Philemon, Bishop of Gaza
Onesimus (Not the Onesimus mentioned in the Epistle to Philemon)
Epaphras, Bishop of Andriaca
Archippus
Silas, Bishop of Corinth
Silvanus
Crescens
Crispus, Bishop of Chalcedon in Galilee
Epenetus, Bishop of Carthage
Andronicus, Bishop of Pannonia
Stachys, Bishop of Byzantium
Amplias, Bishop of Odissa (Odessus)
Urban, Bishop of Macedonia
Narcissus, Bishop of Athens
Apelles, Bishop of Heraklion
Aristobulus, Bishop of Britain
Herodion, Bishop of Patras
Agabus the Prophet
Rufus, Bishop of Thebes
Asyncritus, Bishop of Hyrcania
Phlegon, Bishop of Marathon
Hermes, Bishop of Philippopolis
Parrobus, Bishop of Pottole
Hermas, Bishop of Dalmatia
Pope Linus, Bishop of Rome
Gaius, Bishop of Ephesus
Philologus, Bishop of Sinope
Lucius of Cyrene, Bishop of Laodicea in Syria
Jason, Bishop of Tarsus
Sosipater, Bishop of Iconium
Olympas
Tertius, transcriber of the Epistle to the Romans and Bishop of Iconium
Erastus, Bishop of Paneas
Quartus, Bishop of Berytus
Euodias, Bishop of Antioch
Onesiphorus, Bishop of Cyrene
Clement, Bishop of Sardis
Sosthenes, Bishop of Colophon
Apollos, Bishop of Caesarea
Tychicus, Bishop of Colophon
Epaphroditus
Carpus, Bishop of Beroea in Thrace
Quadratus
John Mark (commonly considered identical to Mark the Evangelist), bishop of Byblos[7]
Zenas the Lawyer, Bishop of Diospolis
Aristarchus, Bishop of Apamea in Syria
Pudens
Trophimus
Mark, Bishop of Apollonia[disambiguation needed]
Artemas, Bishop of Lystra
Aquila
Fortunatus
Achaicus 1 Corinthians 16:17
Tabitha, a woman disciple, whom Peter raised from the dead

Now that is a lot of Bishops and Churches in my book.

The Wikipedia site you point to describes East=Apostle and West=Disciple

These are lots of people listed in the bible. So is it fair to say that you believe that all of these are accurately to be called as Apostles?

 

[Contarini]

These threads of yours are getting tiresome. Perhaps I missed the thread entitled “Why Coptic Christian should be Protestant.” Your continual focus on this supposed campaign to make you a Protestant risks looking a bit egotistical.

I understand that you may live in a real-world environment where people are trying to make you a Protestant. So pour out the riches of your reasoning upon those folks. On this forum your approach doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Of course, if you really mean “why all misguided Protestants on this forum should be Catholic,” then have the courage and honesty to say so.

Edwin

 

[FabiusMaximus]

You know, I am giving this some serious thought. I know about the characters of the Apostolic Churches, the characters of the Protestant reformation, give me some identifiable names of the third wave. Certainly they must have names and be visible. Bet they are not invisible. Please name them for me.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism

This could be of some help.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

The Wikipedia site you point to describes East=Apostle and West=Disciple

These are lots of people listed in the bible. So is it fair to say that you believe that all of these are accurately to be called as Apostles?

Even Irenaeus had an incredible amount of trouble trying to chase all the apostles down. Further, a disciple of his, Hippolytus attempted to name the 70 but that list has not been completely welcome.

The entire point is that you are using the term apostolic in an exclusive matter when you lack knowledge and understanding of the term and what it entails.

The most important attribute for an apostle and/or a disciple is humbleness, as it is clearly shown throughout Scripture. And the first step of acquiring knowledge is understand that it is impossible for us to know it all and there will always be someone who might know more than you, again showing humbleness.

In the same way you don’t want other religions/denominations to assume and generalize your beliefs, you should not generalize and assume that of others.

Our Lord and Savior said it better than any other:

[bibledrb]Luke 6:31[/bibledrb]

Or in today’s English:

*And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.
(Luke 6:31 ESV)

God Bless

 

[CopticChristian]

These threads of yours are getting tiresome. Perhaps I missed the thread entitled “Why Coptic Christian should be Protestant.” Your continual focus on this supposed campaign to make you a Protestant risks looking a bit egotistical.

I understand that you may live in a real-world environment where people are trying to make you a Protestant. So pour out the riches of your reasoning upon those folks. On this forum your approach doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Of course, if you really mean “why all misguided Protestants on this forum should be Catholic,” then have the courage and honesty to say so.

Edwin

You have the right not to participate thus relieving you of being tired. You innacurate assesmment suggests that you did not read the post properly. Your inference of understanding my focus is ill formed. I am not sure how you can have understanding of my environment. You are trying to provide me your understanding of the rules of this forum and in answer to your proposition, I do not need to ask that, this is Catholic Answers.

 

[CopticChristian]

The most important attribute for an apostle and/or a disciple is humbleness, as it is clearly shown throughout Scripture. In the same way you don’t want other religions/denominations to assume and generalize your beliefs, you should not generalize and assume that of others.

Our Lord and Savior said it better than any other:

[bibledrb]Luke 6:31[/bibledrb]

Or in today’s English:

God Bless

The criteria for being an Apostle is different as you propose. This causes me to ask the following question, I am asking and not generalizing. You are free to correct my lack of understanding.

There are as I understand it in Protestant thought 3 different movements, called heresies, by Reformed Protestants. These are Emergent Church, Purpose Driven Movement and in particular as it applies to this thread The New Apostolic Reformation Movement. This has been described as a revival of Pietism. The roots include Rousas J. Rushdoony, C.Peter Wagner, and as I see it is Dominionism. This is basically Calvinism as I understand it.

Much of this is based on readings of Jane Lead, Warnock and others. It is as I understand it also called the Latter Rain Movement. It is my understanding that Ted Haagard was part of this and basically states that The Church is the new incarnation of Christ who won’t return until we get holy enough. The movement includes children Joels army, casting out demons in cities and declarations of New Apostels that are worldwide prophesying and casting out demons.

This I beleive is called by Protestants the third wave. It is not well spoken of by Reformed people and as much as I understand about it leads me to believe that your post lends itself to the broader defintion of Apostle.

This movement would confirm my proposition that Protestanism is a new religion originating with white europeans and this movement in Colorado would suggest that a new revalation originating with white North Americans is part and parcel of the confusion commenced by Knox, Zwingli, Luther, Calvin and others. Am I to believe that God has singled out Caucasions in Europe and in North America to reveal his truths?

 

[CopticChristian]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism

This could be of some help.

31Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 33They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

The Judaizing Jew believed and stated the same as Paul addresses these Jews. In order to be set free Paul pointed out that their presumed heritage was not Abraham but rather Adam. Heritage, pedigree was important and that is why Jesus had to dialogue about wrong thinking as to origins. Paul made that clear as he pointed out in the letter to the Romans that Jew, Gentile, Barbarian are all descendants of Adam. From Adam to Jesus there is a pedigree forwards and backwards.

e conoscerete la verità, e la verità vi farà liberi.

In this context and this understanding it is to look at the origin of what you believe and compare and contrast it to where you came from. Where does your Church and teachings have origins in Apostolic teachings forward and backward.

The assemlies of God have a history and origin, The Anglicans have a history and origin, as do all that claim to be a church.

 

[Contarini]

You have the right not to participate thus relieving you of being tired. You innacurate assesmment suggests that you did not read the post properly. Your inference of understanding my focus is ill formed. I am not sure how you can have understanding of my environment. You are trying to provide me your understanding of the rules of this forum and in answer to your proposition, I do not need to ask that, this is Catholic Answers.

I’m not informing you of the rules of this forum. I said nothing about the rules of the forum.

I’m simply questioning the accuracy and reasonableness of your post titles.

Edwin

 

[CopticChristian]

I’m not informing you of the rules of this forum. I said nothing about the rules of the forum.

I’m simply questioning the accuracy and reasonableness of your post titles.

Edwin

These threads of yours are getting tiresome. Perhaps I missed the thread entitled “Why Coptic Christian should be Protestant.” Your continual focus on this supposed campaign to make you a Protestant risks looking a bit egotistical.

To you. You missed the point. The title is at the top. You may be tired. You may need glasses. You may not believe this is of value. Only you know why you missed the point. I do not use the words ego, id or the like as I do not believe in Freud. I do not understand what you mean by ego.

My campaign? That is a judgement.

I understand that you may live in a real-world environment where people are trying to make you a Protestant. So pour out the riches of your reasoning upon those folks. On this forum your approach doesn’t make a lot of sense

.

You understand this and do not understand the point of the thread as you mistated it. You seem not to see reason. My approach as you see it does not make sense in your opinion, to you.

Of course, if you really mean “why all misguided Protestants on this forum should be Catholic,” then have the courage and honesty to say so.

I agree with this.

Does this analysis provide you more clarity. If you look at the first post and the top of this post you will see the purpose. You mistated it as “Why Coptic Christian should be Protestant.”

You should know that when you make any statement, the initial statement, if misdirected or mistated creates a disharmony of the remainder of the statements. In this case your lack of understanding and subsequent dialogue becomes a kinda, “huh” he did not understand the post and therefore all that follows is based on that misunderstanding. This creates a disconnect from most of what you formulate.

 

[Contarini]

Here’s my point:

By phrasing the question as “why I can’t be Protestant,” you are making it seem as if you are on the defensive, when you are really on the offensive.

This is the language I would expect from someone who had seriously considered becoming a Protestant and had decided not to.

You’re a Coptic Catholic. Why would you be Protestant? Why do you think anyone cares about making you Protestant?

The default is for everyone to stay what they already are. It’s not news that you can’t be Protestant. What’s news is if you have a reason why Protestants should be Catholic. And that’s really what you mean.

You’re being passive-aggressive and obnoxious. You are of course welcome to behave in this way if you wish. I often behave in ways that other people find obnoxious. You are welcome not to respond to me. I will not comment further on your methods unless you respond to this post, or unless you do something which I find obnoxious in a different way.

And your weird belief that the use of the word “egotism” is somehow Freudian further demonstrates with what rashness and ignorance you have charged into the noble task of advocating the truth of your Church.

Edwin

 

[CopticChristian]

Here’s my point:

By phrasing the question as “why I can’t be Protestant,” you are making it seem as if you are on the defensive, when you are really on the offensive.

This is the language I would expect from someone who had seriously considered becoming a Protestant and had decided not to.

You’re a Coptic Catholic. Why would you be Protestant? Why do you think anyone cares about making you Protestant?

The default is for everyone to stay what they already are. It’s not news that you can’t be Protestant. What’s news is if you have a reason why Protestants should be Catholic. And that’s really what you mean.

You’re being passive-aggressive and obnoxious. You are of course welcome to behave in this way if you wish. I often behave in ways that other people find obnoxious. You are welcome not to respond to me. I will not comment further on your methods unless you respond to this post, or unless you do something which I find obnoxious in a different way.

And your weird belief that the use of the word “egotism” is somehow Freudian further demonstrates with what rashness and ignorance you have charged into the noble task of advocating the truth of your Church.

Edwin

You have made interesting inferences. I am Apostolic, I have been proselytized, told I am in a cult, told that Catholics add to the Bible, told that I worship Mary, told that I belong to a works rigteusness religion of men, told I am in the Whore of Babylon, told the Pope is the anti-christ, told that they are the historic church, insulted, been lied to, and defended the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church against well meaning Protestants that love me too much to let me go to hell and in the final analysis…they lack Apostolic succession, because I am Apostolic, they are not I can’t be Protestant.

Does this work for you?

Id, ego and super-ego are the three parts of the psychic apparatus defined in Sigmund Freud’s structural model of the psyche.

You do not know all of my beliefs and you judge all my beliefs without qualification.
Why am I obligated to use the term ego. Your criticism is interesting. I have wierd beliefs. I am rash, ignorant and noble. I like the ignorant more than the rash or noble.

I will keep this in mind. You do not like my mind. I do. You think I am wierd. Many people do. I will broadcast my ignorance. I think rash and noble will have to wait.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

The criteria for being an Apostle is different as you propose. This causes me to ask the following question, I am asking and not generalizing. You are free to correct my lack of understanding.

There are as I understand it in Protestant thought 3 different movements, called heresies, by Reformed Protestants. These are Emergent Church, Purpose Driven Movement and in particular as it applies to this thread The New Apostolic Reformation Movement. This has been described as a revival of Pietism. The roots include Rousas J. Rushdoony, C.Peter Wagner, and as I see it is Dominionism. This is basically Calvinism as I understand it.

Much of this is based on readings of Jane Lead, Warnock and others. It is as I understand it also called the Latter Rain Movement. It is my understanding that Ted Haagard was part of this and basically states that The Church is the new incarnation of Christ who won’t return until we get holy enough. The movement includes children Joels army, casting out demons in cities and declarations of New Apostels that are worldwide prophesying and casting out demons.

This I beleive is called by Protestants the third wave. It is not well spoken of by Reformed people and as much as I understand about it leads me to believe that your post lends itself to the broader defintion of Apostle.

This movement would confirm my proposition that Protestanism is a new religion originating with white europeans and this movement in Colorado would suggest that a new revalation originating with white North Americans is part and parcel of the confusion commenced by Knox, Zwingli, Luther, Calvin and others. Am I to believe that God has singled out Caucasions in Europe and in North America to reveal his truths?

Like you, I lack understanding in an array of things

To be frank, there are so many “Christian” movements that it is practically impossible to keep track of them.

I honestly believe that the term apostle is pretty simple to define.

That the Church Fathers can trace a line of apostles to Peter shows a lot of dedication and sacrifice to keep the traditions and the word of God as we know it.

What do you think the Pharisees thought of Jesus and all of his apostles and disciples?

Probably the same as the Church thought or thinks of Protestants today.

Disclaimer: In no way I am inferring the Protestant movement as a 2nd coming of Jesus.

However, who are we to decide what messenger our Lord chooses to carry His word? How much do we know of God’s messengers in China, Nepal, Middle East, etc? Have you looked at the Voices of the Martyr’s website? Christians persecuted and killed for spreading the word of God. While we sit comfortable in our chairs with air conditioning, there are men and women living the persecution that the early church lived long ago.

So in my limited view of things, most of these apostles are not Caucasian at all. And if our Lord decides to choose only Caucasians like he chose only Jews for thousands of years, Who am I to question His decision?

God Bless.