"I have no religion, I just follow Jesus and His Word"

[Genesis315]

reen12:

It’s the wheat/chaff separators who’ve complicated things, IMHO.

Well, you are right that the wheat will grow with the chaff, but we all know what happens to the chaff when the harvest comes (into the fire). The best is to preach the truth so that the most people possible can choose to be wheat. We need not separate the wheat from the chaff, but distinguishing wheat-ish doctrine from chaff-ish doctrine is a good idea.

They put me in mind of no one so much as the Pharisees:
“You have burdened My people with laws of your own
making…”

reen12

And these sola scriptura loners are making their own laws by erroneously interpreting Scripture.

 

[reen12]

quote: ahimsaman72

I might also add that sermons and words spoken by Christ are not at all clear sometimes - not the way they were collected and written down. I would imagine that many of Christ’s words and sermons were distorted or lost.

Exactly.
What *is *essential, in what Christ taught, is there for all to see:
“Love the Lord, thy God, with thy whole mind, heart and
strength.
And the second is like unto it: Love thy neighbor as thyself.”
[echoed by: What is hateful to thyself, do not do to another.]

I agree with the thought that Saul would need an “interpreter.”
But, then, that’s what happens whenever the theologians
get rolling.
IMHO, no one would be more perplexed than Jesus of
Nazareth, to see what His clear guidance generated.

reen12

 

[reen12]

quote: Lazerlike42

You are stuck thinking in human terms. God did not leave men in charge. He left Himself in charge, working through men through the Holy Spirit. It is by this that the Church can tell us which interpretation of Scripture is truth.

“He left Himself in charge, working through men…”

While I respect your belief, I do not share it.

You are stuck thinking in human terms

No, humans are “stuck” with being human beings, graced by
God with an intellect and common sense…and with the
Ten Commandments…summarized by Jesus, in His
response to the young man, in terms of “What must I do
to inherit eternal life?”
All the rest are human attempts to “understand” God.

You maintain [believe]:

“He left Himself in charge, working through men…”

And we see where* that’s* got us, for 20 centuries.

“Love the Lord, thy God, with thy whole mind, heart and
strength.
And the second is like unto it: Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

Couldn’t have said it better.:tiphat:

reen12

 

[reen12]

Hi, Genesis315,

And these sola scriptura loners are making their own laws by erroneously interpreting Scripture.

I won’t give you an argument, here.

If an individual maintains that we shouldn’t drink wine,
common sense says: Jesus drank wine and commanded
us to use bread and wine in remembering Him.

But there is a distinct difference in that kind of enterprise
and maintaining that any group speaks, unerringly, in
God’s name.

I do pay attention, with respect, when a given Pope speaks
on a moral matter. I look for guidance, in good conscience.
Guidance. That’s what adults do, in my assessment.

If individuals want to accept that Saul reflected the reality
of the meaning of Jesus’ life, fine. If these individuals wish
to believe that the successors of Peter speak unerringly,
fine again.

When all the dust settles, the words of Jesus ring out
in all clarity: “Love the Lord, thy God, with thy whole mind, heart and
strength.
And the second is like unto it: Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

reen12

 

[reen12]

BTW, I maintain that if I couldn’t locate a Catholic moral theologian, to consult on a serious matter, the next person I’d look to speak with would be an Orthodox rabbi. Come to think of it, I’d probably consult both.

reen12

 

[Maccabees]

ahimsaman72:

I wasn’t speaking of non-denoms. We were talking about people “going it alone” in their Christianity, which includes all denoms of people. Many have left the Anglican, Baptist and Methodist churches because of the gross negligence of their respective churches.

As I stated already, once the immigrants came here to America (to escape the tyrannical rule of their respective former countries) Christianity naturally EVOLVED into what it is today. It is terribly naive to think that any religion is static. It isn’t. Religion is like the people who follow it. People change. Their religion changes. It really is a natural thing.

One can very well find the Christ of the Bible and the message He gave to humanity. That message is to love others and yourself. One doesn’t live in a vaccuum. Someone secluded from society and not introduced to Christianity and reading the Bible might not figure out the Trinity. Does that change the God of the Trinity? Does that change the Son of the Trinity? No.

By the way, I don’t know of anyone who started a protestant church in their garage. Their living room, maybe, yes. But, wait, wasn’t that like the new believers in Christ in the first century? Didn’t they meet in homes. Lydia had people in her home to worship together. Why doesn’t that fit into your picture perfect postcard of organized Christianity?

Peace…

Chistianity did not evolve into everyone going it alone. This is religious relativism and individualism as its worst Christianity was formed within a formed faith community with the common beliefs shared not kept to himslef as one owns truth. You have desribed gnosticism and todays’ non-denom types but not traditional christianity. This is a pale immitation of authentic christiantiy. Christinity was never me an my bible the BIble itself is written to a faith coummnity with common leaders and authorities respecteda s such by the entier church no one was going solo by himself.
And one reading by himself the Bible without the church to guide him is loosing out of some awesome truths like the Trintiy it is not the dogma that is lessened but the loss of the individual’s understanding of God. THe solo christian looses out. Also I hate to break this to you but I have never met a holy person who has decided to pursue Christiantiy this way you can deny this all you want and you yourself may be the exception but in my personal experience many people that go sola christa can’t play by rules so they make up their own and set the standard so low as to negate a holy life.

I have nothing against catholic or orthodox churchs that are secretly underground and are in homes and garages becuase of necessity becasuse of persection from governments and Isalm in fact I applaud them also the early church did this out of necessity to survive. However I do think that a person who starts a whole brand new denomination 2000 years after the apostolic church was started in their living room or garage becuase no church has got it right out there and they alone do naturally 2000 years later are deluding themselves into denying that the infant church in Acts would natrually grow into an more organized form. This would be like having a 30 year old child and wanting him to suck his thumb and drink the milk bottle because he looked so cute doing this when he was 1.
The church has grown up and parts of it look very different than the picure we see in Acts and some parts look very similiar due to their underground status. But for a new denom in free america to hide out in their lviing room becasue Hey that’s the way Paul did it is basing his vision of a church on a false allusion. Funny most non-denoms that are ultimately successful get bigger and bigger and many mega churches have started in a living room on the false notion they are starting pristine christiantiy all over again 2000 years later. They are not they are starting a new religion.

 

[ahimsaman72]

Maccabees:

Chistianity did not evolve into everyone going it alone. This is religious relativism and individualism as its worst Christianity was formed within a formed faith community with the common beliefs shared not kept to himslef as one owns truth. You have desribed gnosticism and todays’ non-denom types but not traditional christianity. This is a pale immitation of authentic christiantiy. Christinity was never me an my bible the BIble itself is written to a faith coummnity with common leaders and authorities respecteda s such by the entier church no one was going solo by himself.
And one reading by himself the Bible without the church to guide him is loosing out of some awesome truths like the Trintiy it is not the dogma that is lessened but the loss of the individual’s understanding of God. THe solo christian looses out. Also I hate to break this to you but I have never met a holy person who has decided to pursue Christiantiy this way you can deny this all you want and you yourself may be the exception but in my personal experience many people that go sola christa can’t play by rules so they make up their own and set the standard so low as to negate a holy life.

I have nothing against catholic or orthodox churchs that are secretly underground and are in homes and garages becuase of necessity becasuse of persection from governments and Isalm in fact I applaud them also the early church did this out of necessity to survive. However I do think that a person who starts a whole brand new denomination 2000 years after the apostolic church was started in their living room or garage becuase no church has got it right out there and they alone do naturally 2000 years later are deluding themselves into denying that the infant church in Acts would natrually grow into an more organized form. This would be like having a 30 year old child and wanting him to suck his thumb and drink the milk bottle because he looked so cute doing this when he was 1.
The church has grown up and parts of it look very different than the picure we see in Acts and some parts look very similiar due to their underground status. But for a new denom in free america to hide out in their lviing room becasue Hey that’s the way Paul did it is basing his vision of a church on a false allusion. Funny most non-denoms that are ultimately successful get bigger and bigger and many mega churches have started in a living room on the false notion they are starting pristine christiantiy all over again 2000 years later. They are not they are starting a new religion.

Obviously, Christianity has evolved into go-it-alone. You have said it yourself. Your whole post indicates you believe this. Christianity has certainly evolved. And it will continue to evolve further. It is natural. I’ve said this before.

There were gnostics underground and they were forced into that situation because of pressure from the orthodox Christian crowd. Their beliefs were suppressed and declared heretical. So, the only way they could practice without discrimination was to go away from the rest of Christianity and live alone. The gnostics were primarily a secretive group. They had secret beliefs not intended for everyone. That is not the picture of todays Christians who go-it-alone. They believe the basic, mainline beliefs but for various reasons find organizational Christianity hypocritical and unnecessary.

I personally know people that do not attend church and who are the best Christians I know. They actually follow the example of Christ and love the Lord with their whole heart. Just because you don’t know any doesn’t mean they aren’t there. I am not one of them myself. I’m a practicing Buddhist.

Authentic Christianity began in the first century with believers meeting outdoors, in homes or wherever they could. They did it because they were forced to do so. There were no churches to begin with (organizational). The New Testament is clear on this. I cited one example - Lydia. There are also others: Priscilla and Aquilla.

You refuse to see this authenticity and exchange reality for the organization that sprang up later in Christianity (Catholicism). No historical documents you can show me can invalidate the early Christians meeting in homes or wherever they could. There was no organization for those new believers. Once churches were established by the apostles (and Paul) organization began to take place. Christians were first called “Christians” in Antioch. This is all basic New Testament knowledge and history.

But your church has written its own history with rules and regulations that Christ did not institute.

Peace…

 

[ahimsaman72]

reen12:

quote: ahimsaman72

Exactly.
What *is *essential, in what Christ taught, is there for all to see:
“Love the Lord, thy God, with thy whole mind, heart and
strength.
And the second is like unto it: Love thy neighbor as thyself.”
[echoed by: What is hateful to thyself, do not do to another.]

I agree with the thought that Saul would need an “interpreter.”
But, then, that’s what happens whenever the theologians
get rolling.
IMHO, no one would be more perplexed than Jesus of
Nazareth, to see what His clear guidance generated.

reen12

You are absolutely right my friend. Christ did not teach: rule #1 no speaking unless spoken to, #2 no beards are allowed, #3 you must bow three times, say the Lord’s Prayer and walk around in circles for 15 minutes. He didn’t do any of this. He used simple language and gave simple instructions for living the holy life. How often people forget His command to “Love the Lord your God…” and “Love your neighbor as yourself”, but feel free to institute rules 1, 2 and 3 above.

Peace…

 

[noodlecore]

when people ask what denomination i am, i usually say “baptist”, just to cut down on the confusion. but i dont really believe in denominations, i think they put too much emphasis on things other than Christ and his call for our lives (our call being to take up our cross and follow him). but just because i dont have a religion doesnt mean i dont go to church. church is an important place to gather and be held accountable. personally, i think denominations and organized religion is a form of idolatry, especially when anyone (mary, john the baptist, etc.) is put on a pedestal.

 

[noodlecore]

Davethewave:

If one is to say “I just follow Jesus and His word” but they also say “I have no religion” then they contradict themself in the same sentance, Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 and 19 “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” These passages both show that Peter is the Pope of the Holy Catholic church, and it shows that the Holy Catholic church is what Jesus called “My church” it also shows that Peter and the future popes have papal Infallibility. So if one truly follows Jesus and His word, then they will know that the Catholic church is His word.

How does that passage show that the Catholic church is the one he is talking about? why would jesus show favortism towards a church that has so many self imposed rules? why would he all of a sudden chose catholicism over the jews? and where does jesus say its okay for catholics to make up all of these rules and positions for falliable people? please help me out here, so i can figure all of this stuff out.

 

[amanda_nicole82]

Genesis315:

Well, you are right that the wheat will grow with the chaff, but we all know what happens to the chaff when the harvest comes (into the fire). The best is to preach the truth so that the most people possible can choose to be wheat. We need not separate the wheat from the chaff, but distinguishing wheat-ish doctrine from chaff-ish doctrine is a good idea.

And these sola scriptura loners are making their own laws by erroneously interpreting Scripture.

Erroneously? The Holy Spirit gives me the wisdom to interpret scripture. I pray to the Lord for wisdom, the Bible is clear that all wisdom comes from Him and that He desires us to pray for it.

 

[amanda_nicole82]

Philthy:

You are correct, there will only be one religion in Heaven. The question is does it matter which religion you practice here on earth? Does your interpretation of Gods word matter or does everyone get an A for effort and automatically go to heaven?

Jesus Christ is our High Priest and Paschal Lamb for all eternity.
You are correct, however, that no need for sacraments will exist any more - nor will they be available to those who should have taken advantage of them while they were…

Peace,

PHil
There is only one way to get to Heaven, and it is not through religious effort.

 

[amanda_nicole82]

bengal_fan:

but we aren’t there yet! the sacraments here on earth allow us to experience heaven now (as much as we can in this fallen world). so to not participate in them is to deny yourself heaven here and now.

Heaven on earth is experienced through the Lord’s blessings on our lives. The Lord blesses those who believe in Him and live for HIm - not just Catholics. I can testify to that!
In Christ,
Amanda

 

[Davethewave]

noodlecore:

How does that passage show that the Catholic church is the one he is talking about?

I thought it was rather clear the way I put it earlyer, but in a more simple way “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church” Peter is the first pope of the Holy Catholic church, so there should be no question as to what church Jesus is calling His.

noodlecore:

why would jesus show favortism towards a church that has so many self imposed rules? why would he all of a sudden chose catholicism over the jews? and where does jesus say its okay for catholics to make up all of these rules and positions for falliable people?

“And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven” He is giving Peter the power of the Pope to bind or loose within the Holy Catholic church. “and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” meaning there cannot be a bad pope, the pope can never do will against that of the Lord in the teachings of the church.

noodlecore:

please help me out here, so i can figure all of this stuff out.

The word of the Lord.

 

[E.E.N.S]

amanda_nicole82:

Erroneously? The Holy Spirit gives me the wisdom to interpret scripture. I pray to the Lord for wisdom, the Bible is clear that all wisdom comes from Him and that He desires us to pray for it.

Then why is it that so many people who do the same as you come up with different, even conflicting, answers? The Holy Spirit cannot contradict Himself, yet amongst the tens of thousands of different protestant sects there is mass contradictions…what is your justification for this? (Could it be that you are not led by the Spirit of Truth? 1+1 can only equal one thing…)

 

[E.E.N.S]

Davethewave:

The word of the Lord.

Thanks be to God!

 

[Loboto-Me]

Ah but there WERE bad Popes, we must all admit it. BUT, those Popes still never led the Church astray in matters of FAITH and DOCTRINE. This is the area there can never be a “bad” Pope, Jesus Himself has promised to be with the Church til the end, and He promised that the gates of hell would never EVER prevail… He’s kept his promise.

 

[Presence]

Obviously, Christianity has evolved into go-it-alone. You have said it yourself. Your whole post indicates you believe this. Christianity has certainly evolved. And it will continue to evolve further. It is natural. I’ve said this before.

Well, Orthodox Christianity hasn’t really de-evolved at all. But for us Catholics this makes perfect sense. Of course for you, a non-believer, religion naturally changes over time, and isn’t “static”. But God is actually changeless, so why should His church change, or evolve? (Equating evolving with developing and growing is not what I am doing.) Do people of the present need more, or something different, of God than people of the past?

When I think of evolving, and this may not necessarily be true, but, I think of it more as a refining of something. Making it more suitable. And I certainly cannot say that this division in non-Catholic Christianity is more suitable, to anyone.

You refuse to see this authenticity and exchange reality for the organization that sprang up later in Christianity (Catholicism). No historical documents you can show me can invalidate the early Christians meeting in homes or wherever they could. There was no organization for those new believers. Once churches were established by the apostles (and Paul) organization began to take place. Christians were first called “Christians” in Antioch. This is all basic New Testament knowledge and history.

I don’t think anyone is going to try and invalidate that early Christians met in homes or wherever they could. This is simply understood, due to the fact that Christianity was a new religion, the amount of members, and the aggression it received from non-Christians, etc.

There may not have been a perfectly organized Church as of yet, but the basic structure was there, and it wasn’t the Bible. The organizational foundations had been laid by Christ Himself. It was from this that it ultimately developed to what it is today in the Catholic Church. This too is basic NT knowledge and history.

ahimsaman72, after reading much of what you had to say it finally made sense to me when you mentioned that you are not Christian but in fact a practicing Buddhist. Especially considering when you say things like, “No, it doesn’t make sense to leave a man in charge who was a illiterate, rebellious fisherman” because that is exactly what Jesus Christ did.

Before anything you first went off the idea that our God is not real, that the Holy Spirit is fantasy and cannot work through humankind, then intend to prove that the Catholic Church is wrong. It would have nice to know you were a non-believer from the beginning so we could have answered your questions differently, yes, the answers could have been directed in a more reasonable fashion towards yourself.

Sorry for barging in, I still feel like I need to get my bearings…

 

[ahimsaman72]

Presence:

Well, Orthodox Christianity hasn’t really de-evolved at all. But for us Catholics this makes perfect sense. Of course for you, a non-believer, religion naturally changes over time, and isn’t “static”. But God is actually changeless, so why should His church change, or evolve? (Equating evolving with developing and growing is not what I am doing.) Do people of the present need more, or something different, of God than people of the past?

Orthodox Christianity has devolved because Orthodox Christianity is the beginning seed of the church. It has now devolved into its differing sects. Every religion I can think of has changed over time. Christianity has and Buddhism has. It has nothing to do with whether or not I’m a “believer” or non-“believer”. It’s a matter of fact that such has taken place.

When you speak of God - you are speaking of absolute truth (truth which doesn’t change). But when you speak of man - you must speak of relative truth (because man does change). Wouldn’t you agree that man and God are on different planes of existence? In Buddhism it is similar. There is phenomena and noumena. Different planes of existence.

Look at a ripe picked banana. It is great shape once picked. Leave it a few days. What happens? It degenerates. Why? That’s the order of things. A banana doesn’t last forever. It changes. Now, once you were 5 years old. Now, you are ?? old. Are you the same as you were when you were 5? No. That’s my point.

When I think of evolving, and this may not necessarily be true, but, I think of it more as a refining of something. Making it more suitable. And I certainly cannot say that this division in non-Catholic Christianity is more suitable, to anyone.

I don’t think anyone is going to try and invalidate that early Christians met in homes or wherever they could. This is simply understood, due to the fact that Christianity was a new religion, the amount of members, and the aggression it received from non-Christians, etc.

There may not have been a perfectly organized Church as of yet, but the basic structure was there, and it wasn’t the Bible. The organizational foundations had been laid by Christ Himself. It was from this that it ultimately developed to what it is today in the Catholic Church. This too is basic NT knowledge and history.

ahimsaman72, after reading much of what you had to say it finally made sense to me when you mentioned that you are not Christian but in fact a practicing Buddhist. Especially considering when you say things like, “No, it doesn’t make sense to leave a man in charge who was a illiterate, rebellious fisherman” because that is exactly what Jesus Christ did.

I was Christian the first 32 years of my life. I now have become a Buddhist. And what does that have to do with the arguments I presented? Are they true or not true? Judge them for them, not for who presented them.

Before anything you first went off the idea that our God is not real, that the Holy Spirit is fantasy and cannot work through humankind, then intend to prove that the Catholic Church is wrong. It would have nice to know you were a non-believer from the beginning so we could have answered your questions differently, yes, the answers could have been directed in a more reasonable fashion towards yourself.

I don’t know where you are coming from when you talk of God not being real and the Holy Spirit fantasy and what-not. I never said those things. I simply don’t view those things the way you do. I also never said the Holy Spirit couldn’t work through mankind. I said it doesn’t makes sense for Him to do that. He is immortal and unchanging, however, man by his own created nature is ever-changing and mortal. To entrust a human or human institution doesn’t make sense.

Sorry for barging in, I still feel like I need to get my bearings…

I don’t mind you barging in. I’m concerned that you seem to misinterpret what I have said in my posts though. While I disagree with tenents of your faith, I would not intentionally degrade or blaspheme your God.

Peace…

 

[Philthy]

EA_Man:

I would agree that we are to come together to worship. However, there comes a time when error is rampant that we must warn our brother and then if he won’t listen to have nothing to do with him.

What do you do when you know your church is full of error and they won’t listen? There comes a time when we should separate.

Peace

I hear ya big guy, but I guess my response is that at this point in my life I would never be involved with a church I had the authority to judge. Hmmmmmm…doesn’t leave me much wiggle room does it?!

Phil