Non-denominational Christians

[jack_hawkins]

You cannot say there is NO evidence and you cannot say there is no way we are right for what we believe to be true:

whoa whoa let’s stop the straw men right there
I said there’s nothing that says explicitly
you infer from certain verses certain things, but that is a matter of hermeneutics - it isn’t there explicitly, and my reply was to someone (Ian S) who said there was **explicit **mentions in the Bible that one authoritative infallible church was established
can we stick to what people have said not what other people think or want them to have said?

 

[IanS]

I will repeat “explicit”
yes Simon Peter was a pastor, one of the five fold ministries
I don’t see how these verses argue for a papal succession

I understand that you are a former Pentecostal joining the Orthodox Church. I suggest you drop your explicit “Bible Alone” approach to everything and embrace Sacred Tradition. Would you accept the writings of the Church Fathers?

 

[jack_hawkins]

I understand that you are a former Pentecostal joining the Orthodox Church. I suggest you drop your explicit “Bible Alone” approach to everything and embrace Sacred Tradition. Would you accept the writings of the Church Fathers?

I suggest you stop making assumptions:thumbsup:

 

[IanS]

I suggest you stop making assumptions:thumbsup:

What else do you expect me to assume when you keep demanding verbatim quotes from the Bible which are “explicit” enough for your personal liking?

If someone doesn’t want to believe something they simply won’t believe it no matter what they are told or read.

If some people hear one pebble of what they want to hear that they could possibly intemperate as standing in contrast to the mountain of truth, they’ll always take the pebble and use it to sooth their itchy ears.

 

[guanophore]

I suggest you stop making assumptions:thumbsup:

Actually, Jack, those are all things that you have purported on this forum about your background, except that you first said you were in CatholicRCIA and now you are saying it is Orthodox.

all that aside, you did not answer the question. Will you accept Sacred Tradition? Will you be educated by the FAthers?

 

[jack_hawkins]

well I think it’s prudent to assume very little but that’s me
I was addressing a very specific point, namely whether or not there is explicit mention of the establishment of one authoritative infallible church
the issue of whether or not the verses support a particular interpretation is slightly different , and not the one I was addressing
to assume from this that I believe in “Bible Alone” is to misconstrue

 

[jack_hawkins]

Actually, Jack, those are all things that you have purported on this forum about your background, except that you first said you were in CatholicRCIA and now you are saying it is Orthodox.

all that aside, you did not answer the question. Will you accept Sacred Tradition? Will you be educated by the FAthers?

The assumption I was referring to was "your explicit “Bible Alone” approach to everything " - of course the rest is not assumption but statement of the known facts
my argument is about the scriptures since it was stated this was explicit in the scriptures
do I accept Sacred Tradition? depends on who is asking and why
if I’m being asked that to suppress any further debate, then the answer tends to be “no” - otherwise nothing gets properly answered

 

[guanophore]

well I think it’s prudent to assume very little but that’s me
I was addressing a very specific point, namely whether or not there is explicit mention of the establishment of one authoritative infallible church
the issue of whether or not the verses support a particular interpretation is slightly different , and not the one I was addressing
to assume from this that I believe in “Bible Alone” is to misconstrue

I agree with you about assumptions. But you have made no secret that you don’t think you should submit to the teachings of the Magesterium, who are a “bunch of old, celibate men”. It is understandible that people would get the idea that you do not accept an extra-scripural authority.

 

[jack_hawkins]

I agree with you about assumptions. But you have made no secret that you don’t think you should submit to the teachings of the Magisterium, who are a “bunch of old, celibate men”. It is understandible that people would get the idea that you do not accept an extra-scriptural authority.

I don’t think it’s outrageous to suggest that as human vessels of clay that someone who is celibate and has been for some time (if not all their life) might lack insight into certain aspects of married life - as evidenced by the universal answer to any quandary in that area, NFP or abstinence.
My problem is that too often this is used to stop any conversation on a matter. There may be compelling reasons for certain doctrines, but I’m not sure most people bother finding out since it makes zero difference.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t think it’s outrageous to suggest that as human vessels of clay that someone who is celibate and has been for some time (if not all their life) might lack insight into certain aspects of married life - as evidenced by the universal answer to any quandary in that area, NFP or abstinence.
My problem is that too often this is used to stop any conversation on a matter. There may be compelling reasons for certain doctrines, but I’m not sure most people bother finding out since it makes zero difference.

I am sure that persons called to celibacy do, indeed, lack some insight into married life. However, their duty is to preserve the teaching to the faithful of the Divine Revelation with regard to faith and morals. These principles of divine revelation do not chang in character if one is married or celibate. I think you are right, people are only led to research the compelling reasons of the decisions if they are personally affected by them. I hope that you will carefully research the Church’s teaching about marriage and fertility. The principles are based in the teachings of Jesus, who was also celibate, but of whom one cannot say He lacks insight into our condition. if you can receive the teachings of the church as the teachings of Jesus, you will find healing for your marriage and fertility.

 

[jack_hawkins]

I am sure that persons called to celibacy do, indeed, lack some insight into married life. However, their duty is to preserve the teaching to the faithful of the Divine Revelation with regard to faith and morals. These principles of divine revelation do not chang in character if one is married or celibate. I think you are right, people are only led to research the compelling reasons of the decisions if they are personally affected by them. I hope that you will carefully research the Church’s teaching about marriage and fertility. The principles are based in the teachings of Jesus, who was also celibate, but of whom one cannot say He lacks insight into our condition. if you can receive the teachings of the church as the teachings of Jesus, you will find healing for your marriage and fertility.

Janice is having her womb out in just over a month’s time and she’s already had a Thermachoice, so there is no chance short of a miracle of Janice having a child. It is certainly nothing to do with my own motives or desires that I question some of the ideas put to me by Catholic posters. Most of the teachings on marriage and fertility I have no problem with, it’s just the difficult situations where everyone seems to imply that abstinence would be so easy for a man and wife. Possibly they don’t have a high sex drive or a passionate marriage, who knows? Abstinence inside of marriage is not recommended in the Bible (except for limited periods by mutual consent) , that is certainly true.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t think it’s outrageous to suggest that as human vessels of clay that someone who is celibate and has been for some time (if not all their life) might lack insight into certain aspects of married life - as evidenced by the universal answer to any quandary in that area, NFP or abstinence.

You’re aware that they hear the Confessions of married people, though, right? (Mine, for instance …)

It’s quite possible that they know more about marriage than those of us who have only ever experienced the difficulties of one marriage in our lifetime.

 

[jmcrae]

Janice is having her womb out in just over a month’s time and she’s already had a Thermachoice, so there is no chance short of a miracle of Janice having a child. It is certainly nothing to do with my own motives or desires that I question some of the ideas put to me by Catholic posters. Most of the teachings on marriage and fertility I have no problem with, it’s just the difficult situations where everyone seems to imply that abstinence would be so easy for a man and wife. Possibly they don’t have a high sex drive or a passionate marriage, who knows? Abstinence inside of marriage is not recommended in the Bible (except for limited periods by mutual consent) , that is certainly true.

First, we are not required to have children. We are only required to be open to God’s will, and let Him make the decision.

Second, there are many children waiting for adoption. You could adopt.

 

[distracted]

I disagree. The Catholic church is quite denominational. They exclued all other churches and the non-denominational church welcomes people of all denominations.

The Catholic Church welcomes everyone. And non-denoms don’t welcome Catholics. I know because i have been to many of them… As soon as i say i am Catholic (and won’t be convinced to convert to their way of thinking), i am ostracized…

 

[Syele]

The Catholic Church welcomes everyone. And non-denoms don’t welcome Catholics. I know because i have been to many of them… As soon as i say i am Catholic (and won’t be convinced to convert to their way of thinking), i am ostracized…

The non-denominational church I used to attend had several Catholics there. I know cause I often saw them at Mass before the Non-Denominational service began. It makes me wonder what you did to declare you wouldn’t be converted to their way of thinking. None of the Catholics at my old church went around saying everyone had to agree with them. People in Non-denom churches do not agree on everything, only a small list of main doctrines, most of the time they include Sola Scriptura so there tends to be less Catholics hanging around due to that.

 

[IanS]

well I think it’s prudent to assume very little but that’s me
I was addressing a very specific point, namely whether or not there is explicit mention of the establishment of one authoritative infallible church
the issue of whether or not the verses support a particular interpretation is slightly different , and not the one I was addressing
to assume from this that I believe in “Bible Alone” is to misconstrue

This is very interesting. Even though there is no mention (explicit or otherwise) that the Apostles were all totally equal in authority, or that Christ established several, eronious, fallible churches, with no real earthly authority; you seem to be okay with that idea, even though the evidence we do have would tell otherwise.

 

[distracted]

The non-denominational church I used to attend had several Catholics there. I know cause I often saw them at Mass before the Non-Denominational service began. It makes me wonder what you did to declare you wouldn’t be converted to their way of thinking. None of the Catholics at my old church went around saying everyone had to agree with them. People in Non-denom churches do not agree on everything, only a small list of main doctrines, most of the time they include Sola Scriptura so there tends to be less Catholics hanging around due to that.

i never even got as far as to explain to the non-denoms what i believe. Actually, it was a long time ago & therefore, i don’t remember things about the incidents very well. All i remember is that as soon as i made it clear i wasn’t going to give up the R C. faith, they started being negative toward me… shunned me, etc… I know that not all these kinds of “churches” are the same, people are not all the same… But i know that i didn’t really do anything “wrong” to justify the responses i got… For the most part, they never gave me much time to say anything wrong…
Anyway, Jesus Christ established ONE Church… Sure, it is far from perfect (the members…) but that’s beside the point and no other “church” is any closer to being perfect either… The teachings ARE perfect… and totally biblical. The Catholic Church, contrary to its reputation in some circles, is the most biblical Church of all (but then again, there is only ONE true Church…).
I was tempted to go to a non-Catholic “church” some time ago, for social reasons rather than anything else. Then i had a weird encounter with this Protestant i know… where he just blew up @ me 4 no apparent reason… I told myself that he wouldn’t have acted that way if he had been Catholic… (a real Catholic). I decided i didn’t need to go be around non-Catholics after all…

 

[distracted]

Janice is having her womb out in just over a month’s time and she’s already had a Thermachoice, so there is no chance short of a miracle of Janice having a child. It is certainly nothing to do with my own motives or desires that I question some of the ideas put to me by Catholic posters. Most of the teachings on marriage and fertility I have no problem with, it’s just the difficult situations where everyone seems to imply that abstinence would be so easy for a man and wife. Possibly they don’t have a high sex drive or a passionate marriage, who knows? Abstinence inside of marriage is not recommended in the Bible (except for limited periods by mutual consent) , that is certainly true.

It depends on how long you are talking about. The Bible doesn’t specify how long a couple can/should abstain. But frankly, nowadays, people in general put 2 much emphasis on the sexaul aspect of marriage. If the sexual thing is the main thing, something is very wrong… If 2 people can’t abstain for a couple of weeks, well, again, maybe something is not right. Sometimes people use sex for many different purposes (to relieve stress, to hold onto someone they feel thye are losing, to try to cover up 4 other things lacking in the relationship, etc…).
I’ve been celibate for a very long time. I dont want to be celibate forever but maybe i will have to… So far, it isn’t killing me…
In fact, i heard that unmarried women (particularly nuns) live longer than married ones… which proves to me that men stress women too much… :doh2:

 

[distracted]

Thinking about things and listening to what Catholics have to say here, I have come to the conclusion that the only Christianity that makes any sense to me is non-denominational Christianity. Are there many non-denominational Christians here?

Have u ever taken RCIA (series of) classes? If not, you don’t know the Catholic religion and therefore, cannot say that it makes less sense than the non-denom does… besides, there is no such thing as non-denom… but then, oh well, there also is no such thing as church-ES…
There is ONE Church… and for 1520 + years, everyone knew its name …

 

[distracted]

I label myself non-denominational.

Jesus is denominational - meaning He has a preference for one particular set of beliefs/practices He wants all to adhere to
out of a confusing plethora of many differing ones…
He wants HIS OWN Doctrines taught and practiced…

Many non-Catholic “church’s” beliefs are man-made - such as the eternal security notion, which conflicts with Matthew 18:23, Philippians 2:12, James 2:12 and a host of other scriptures, yet people keep believing this nonsense…
Then there is the notion that there is no Purgatory (1 Cor. 3:13, Matthew 12:32, Matthew 18:23, Revelation, which says that no “unclean thing will enter Heaven.” and other scriptures…).
It is so true that people believe what htey want to believe…