Positive proof the Invisible, non-Catholic Christian Church is right?

[AshleyBelle]

Greetings, and Merry Christmas to everyone who participates on these boards! I enjoy most of the conversation here so much

This is sort of a spin off from the "Positive proof the Catholic Church is right" thread... I hear so many arguments made against the Catholic Church, and most often end up defending my position and my faith against accusations.   But something struck me today...  I would truly like to hear, not arguments against the Catholic church,  but instead,  arguments FOR the truth of the non Catholic Christian/protestant church.  

I don't hear non Catholic Christians uphold the truth of their church nearly as much as I hear the Catholic church being attacked..and I am sincerely interested to hear their position.

I'm sorry if this seems to be a "baiting" thread, and I apologize in advance if it jumps off track and people forget to speak in charity... But I bring this subject up because for me, I felt the Holy Spirit leading and revealing the truth of the Catholic Church to my heart....   I'd like to hear the reasons that non Catholic Christians feel the Holy Spirit leading them to the conclusion the more nebulous , invisible church is the true church.

Thank you and God bless… I look forward to your replies

 

[Rightlydivide]

I am not sure what I would contribute. The phrase “invisible church” does not appear in scripture and as such I could not support it.
I believe the church is composed of all who are saved. What else I believe could be such a vast subject Ashley.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I am not sure what I would contribute. The phrase “invisible church” does not appear in scripture and as such I could not support it.
I believe the church is composed of all who are saved. What else I believe could be such a vast subject Ashley.

I think Ashley is referring to those that argue there is no institutional Church, that it exists only in the hearts of believers and no other form.

 

[AshleyBelle]

I think Ashley is referring to those that argue there is no institutional Church, that it exists only in the hearts of believers and no other form.

That’s essentially what I’m asking, yes

The reason this question came to mind…is that I’ve heard many non Catholic Christians request that people stop referring to them as “Protestants.” I thought, well…it seems from conversations I’ve had with people, that their whole basis of only having an “invisible church” as opposed to the “Catholic visible/invisible institution” is the claim that Catholics are wrong. It’s a constant “protest” in that regard…even if they do not mean it to be that way…

I was guilty of it too… When I was very staunchly evangelical/anti-Catholic (God’s grace and forgiveness is so amazing…that even though I hated His church He still brought me into the fold!).

If non Catholic Christians are not “protestant” then I’d like to hear support for their belief in the invisible church instead of just attacks against the Catholic Church. It’s easy to point the finger and say “you’re wrong!” and then explain why you feel that way… But can we turn it around?

I am asking simply… please show me why the more nebulous/invisible body of believers that exists in their hearts is the “true” church spoken of in scripture…and explain your position

Otherwise… and please forgive me if this sounds uncharitable…but otherwise it seems “protestant” is still the correct term for our separated brothers and sisters in Christ…because all I’ve recieved in conversation is “protest” instead of defense and support.

I do look forward to the replies, if anybody is willing to take up the challenge!
Thanks, and God bless

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I am not sure what I would contribute. The phrase “invisible church” does not appear in scripture and as such I could not support it.
I believe the church is composed of all who are saved. What else I believe could be such a vast subject Ashley.

Hello Rightlydivide,

How do you reconcile all the different doctrines and beliefs of all the believers? We believe God to be truth and it appears to be different “truths” among those who believe.

St. Paul wrote that the believers of those times should be of the same mind and judgment. Do you think believers having different doctrines and beliefs is being of the same mind and judgment?

**Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.**

 

[AshleyBelle]

Nobody is up for the challenge?

I think it is safe to say then… That my assesment is somewhat accurate. I think protestantism itself would not exist without the Catholic Church. Not just because of history…but because without the Catholic church, there would be nothing to attack and declare “wrong.” What truth are non Catholic Christians defending then, concerning the invisible church? Is there anything to defend? Or are we to assume that it is right, because the very sole of protestantism rests in condemning the Catholic Church?

If this is true, I think it is very sad I think if God gives us a truth, then that truth should speak for and defend itself, without relying on condemning and accusing others of being false.

 

[Mijoy2]

I’m not sure this is relevant, I just thought i’d toss it out there.

I’m a Catholic but I can share a perspective I heard from a good friend who is Baptist.

His perspective is that there is in fact one true Church. Christs’ Church is the church of believers. There are relatively few fundemental core beliefs one must poses to be a member of this church. (not sure of the precise list but I’ll give it a shot), belief in the one triune God, that Christ is indeed the only begotten Son of God. Belief in the Holy Spirit as a divine person, one in the trinity, belief Christ died for our sins and was resurrected and acended into Heaven. It’s a short list.

If you hold these fundementals you belong to the Church, all other issues we can debate might need not divide us.

Furthering his perspective he will go on to state that within Roman Catholicism, there are issues that are debated. Hence furthering his case.

I believe he holds a concept of all demoninations (including RC) are smaller circles inside a larger, outside all encompasing circle, which is the Church.

 

[Mijoy2]

If this is true, I think it is very sad I think if God gives us a truth, then that truth should speak for and defend itself, without relying on condemning and accusing others of being false.

It is indeed sad. Think of how powerful an argument Christianity would pose to the non-believing world if we were unified. The fact that we are not hinders growth in my own faith. It’s evidence to the contrary.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Hello Rightlydivide,

How do you reconcile all the different doctrines and beliefs of all the believers? We believe God to be truth and it appears to be different “truths” among those who believe.

St. Paul wrote that the believers of those times should be of the same mind and judgment. Do you think believers having different doctrines and beliefs is being of the same mind and judgment?

**Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.**

Christians do not agree. Some agree more than others obviously. Sure, if everyone was a fundamentalist Bible believing Christian we would see eye to eye on things but I cannot control what they believe or do not believe. I do think that Catholics should follow and interpret the Bible like we do.
We follow the earliest teachings of the church found in the Bible. We do not engage in later extrabiblical practices or doctrines but like I said I cannot control what you do.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Nobody is up for the challenge?

I think it is safe to say then… That my assesment is somewhat accurate. I think protestantism itself would not exist without the Catholic Church. Not just because of history…but because without the Catholic church, there would be nothing to attack and declare “wrong.” What truth are non Catholic Christians defending then, concerning the invisible church? Is there anything to defend? Or are we to assume that it is right, because the very sole of protestantism rests in condemning the Catholic Church?

If this is true, I think it is very sad I think if God gives us a truth, then that truth should speak for and defend itself, without relying on condemning and accusing others of being false.

The question does not make any sense to me. Never heard anyone talk about it

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Christians do not agree. Some agree more than others obviously. Sure, if everyone was a fundamentalist Bible believing Christian we would see eye to eye on things but I cannot control what they believe or do not believe. I do think that Catholics should follow and interpret the Bible like we do.
We follow the earliest teachings of the church found in the Bible. We do not engage in later extrabiblical practices or doctrines but like I said I cannot control what you do.

Thanks for responding, but I don’t feel you addressed my question.

How can you reconcile the differences between all the Protestant denominations, all with different doctrines based on different interpretations of scriptures? Is that being the same mind and judgment in truth as taught by Christ?

What Church are you affliated with? I only asked, because I have specific questions of some doctrines that are clearly spoken of in the Bible that many Protestants do not practice.

Turning this around or throwing in an ad hominem towards the Catholic Church does not help us understand the “invisible non-Catholic Church”.

 

[Rightlydivide]

=Prodigal Son1;4560246]Thanks for responding, but I don’t feel you addressed my question.

How can you reconcile the differences between all the Protestant denominations, all with different doctrines based on different interpretations of scriptures? Is that being the same mind and judgment in truth as taught by Christ?

Like I said, I wish that other Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox agreed with us. Just like I am sure you wish that Orthodox and Protestants agreed with you. I do not think that people should join a church to have unity if they go against the Bible.

What Church are you affliated with? I only asked, because I have specific questions of some doctrines that are clearly spoken of in the Bible that many Protestants do not practice.

I go to a church not associated with a denomination. We are dispensationalist in nature and fundamentalist if that is any help.

Turning this around or throwing in an ad hominem towards the Catholic Church does not help us understand the “invisible non-Catholic Church”.

I do not perceive that I have attacked your church. I disagree with your church obviously. Be specific please. I do not believe in an invisible church. I had never heard anyone use that phrase before this forum.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I believe the church is composed of all who are saved.

There are many Christians, of all denominations, that claim to be saved. This is the “invisible Church” being addressed.

Like I said, I wish that other Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox agreed with us. Just like I am sure you wish that Orthodox and Protestants agreed with you. I do not think that people should join a church to have unity if they go against the Bible.

I understand this point, but it brings to mind a question of, how do you know your Church is right over all the others?

Secondly, what makes you think the other Churchs go against the Bible? While I cannot address the other Churchs, I can address any specific points you wish to make about the Catholic Church.

I go to a church not associated with a denomination. We are dispensationalist in nature and fundamentalist if that is any help.

Does your Church celebrate the Eucharist, communion? I can provide scriptures showing it was taught with specific instructions.

We follow the earliest teachings of the church found in the Bible. We do not engage in later extrabiblical practices or doctrines but like I said I cannot control what you do.

I do not perceive that I have attacked your church. I disagree with your church obviously. Be specific please. I do not believe in an invisible church. I had never heard anyone use that phrase before this forum.

I may have misunderstood your statement of not being able to control what I do as condemning in nature and apologize if that’s not what you meant.

Finally, I have another question. Can you show us where the Bible tells us it is the sole authority in matters of faith and morals?

I, Catholics, believe there is an oral tradition that has been passed through the Church’s history to present day. The oral tradition was the way matters of faith and morals was taught in Biblical days, including by Christ Himself and the Apostles themselves. I can show you where they wrote things they obviously learned orally as well as wrote about things they taught through oral tradition.

There are other scriptures that point out misinterpretations of scriptures, Old Testament scriptures they went by, specifically spoken about by Christ Himself. Peter wrote about people not understanding the scriptures written by Paul.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Prodigal Son1;4560326]There are many Christians, of all denominations, that claim to be saved. This is the “invisible Church” being addressed.

I do not accept the premise. I will not agree that there is such thing as an invisible church. People are either either going to be saved or not. What they claim is irrelevent. I cannot determine their salvation and would not attempt to try.

I understand this point, but it brings to mind a question of, how do you know your Church is right over all the others?

Know? I believe we follow the Bible. I use same thing you do to determine which church to belong to. We have the same personal attributes.

Secondly, what makes you think the other Churchs go against the Bible? While I cannot address the other Churchs, I can address any specific points you wish to make about the Catholic Church.

I am not bashing the Catholic Church and do not want to go that route, I am bored with it. I do believe there are churches that go against the Bible but that is not my problem. I can try to convince them but that is what I can do.

Does your Church celebrate the Eucharist, communion? I can provide scriptures showing it was taught with specific instructions.

We celebrate the Lords Supper. It is a small meal, just like Paul talks about.

Finally, I have another question. Can you show us where the Bible tells us it is the sole authority in matters of faith and morals?

The phrase faith and morals does not appear in scripture not does the phrase sole authority. I do not believe you can ever find my using those terms.

I, Catholics, believe there is an oral tradition that has been passed through the Church’s history to present day. The oral tradition was the way matters of faith and morals was taught in Biblical days, including by Christ Himself and the Apostles themselves. I can show you where they wrote things they obviously learned orally as well as wrote about things they taught through oral tradition.

I have debated the Ante-Nicen Fathers already. Sacred Tradition is a contradictory mess IMO. There is nothing you believe that I think can be proven to come from Christ or his apostles. People have already tried that with me.

There are other scriptures that point out misinterpretations of scriptures, Old Testament scriptures they went by, specifically spoken about by Christ Himself. Peter wrote about people not understanding the scriptures written by Paul

Yes, I believe that he wrote about doctrines of the devil which include restricting what you can eat when and forbidding to marry. We do not do that. However, others have.

 

[jim1130]

I am not sure what I would contribute. The phrase “invisible church” does not appear in scripture and as such I could not support it.
I believe the church is composed of all who are saved

But how do we know who is saved and who is not saved?

 

[ron77nyc]

Romans 8:14 For whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

[Rightlydivide]

But how do we know who is saved and who is not saved?

I cannot see into anyone’s heart and life. I cannot tell who is a hypocrite. People deceive people all the time. God knows who will be saved.

 

[jmcrae]

But how do we know who is saved and who is not saved?

When we have a dispute, Jesus commands us to “take it to the Church.” Jesus presumes, in giving this commandment, that there is recognizable authority in the Church - someone you can find, who has the last word on disputes.

But if the Church is composed of those individuals who are “saved” interthreaded throughout every organization that claims in some way to be Christian, then when we have a dispute, to whom do we go? How do we find the person who has the authority over all of us, to say, “Here’s how it is.”

The Early Church knew where to go - they went to the Apostles. The Apostles went to St. Peter.

If the Catholic Bishops and the Pope are not their true successors, then where are their true successors, today?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The phrase faith and morals does not appear in scripture not does the phrase sole authority. I do not believe you can ever find my using those terms.

Ok, let me rephrase my question. Where does the Bible say it’s the only source to achieve the truth of Christ, excluding other ordinances, doctrines or traditions.

I have debated the Ante-Nicen Fathers already. Sacred Tradition is a contradictory mess IMO. There is nothing you believe that I think can be proven to come from Christ or his apostles. People have already tried that with me.

Well, personally, I find it a shame to disregard all writings of the early Church fathers, many who verify how early Christians practiced their faith. St. Ignatius specifically comes to mind, as he was a disciple of St. John and appointed by St. Peter.

But there are plenty of examples in the Bible if you prefer only that source.

Let me give you a “few” examples of oral tradtion, starting with the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ Himself.

Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,
Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.

This passage shows several things. Number one, how did the people know what Christ was talking about when he spoke of the “chair of Moses”? It was not written anywhere else in the Bible, including the Old Testament. He did not have to explain what he was talking about, because they knew of the chair of Moses through oral tradition.

Number two, he was telling people to observe and do whatsoever they tell you, because He knew He was about to build His Church and it could be protected in matters of faith and morals through His Holy Spirit. He did not tell them to find themselves a Bible and that’s all they needed.

**1Co 10:4 And all drank the same spiritual drink: (And they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ.) **

How did St. Paul know about the rock that followed the Israelites through the desert? It was not written about anywhere else in scriptures, including the Old Testament! St. Paul could have only learned that through, oral tradition.

2Ti 3:8 Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith.

Remember the story of Pharoah’s magicians? You know they turned their staffs into snakes and Moses staff/snake ate them both. How did St. Paul know their names? They are not named anywhere else in the Bible! St. Paul could have only learned this through, oral tradtion.

Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring you ought to support the weak and to remember the word of the Lord Jesus, how he said: It is a more blessed thing to give, rather than to receive.

How did St. Paul know Christ said it was more blessed to give than to receive? It’s not written anywhere else in the Bible! St. Paul was not an eyewitness to Christ. St. Paul could only have known this through oral tradition.

Yes, I believe that he wrote about doctrines of the devil which include restricting what you can eat when and forbidding to marry. We do not do that. However, others have.

**1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us. **

Are the tradition, ordinances and doctrines St. Paul wrote about, as listed above talking “doctrines of the devil”?

If you have some questions about foods or marriage as it applies to Catholic beliefs, I’d be glad to try and address them, or others here will.

 

[Rightlydivide]

jmcrae;4560402]When we have a dispute, Jesus commands us to “take it to the Church.” Jesus presumes, in giving this commandment, that there is recognizable authority in the Church - someone you can find, who has the last word on disputes.

But you have to be careful on this one jmcrae. One cannot extrapolate that all disputes. I prefer the literal meaning of this passage.

But if the Church is composed of those individuals who are “saved” interthreaded throughout every organization that claims in some way to be Christian, then when we have a dispute, to whom do we go?

Of course. Everyone must decide. Of course we have disputes. That goes for anything the Bible teaches. You have to decide what church teaches the truth.

How do we find the person who has the authority over all of us, to say, “Here’s how it is.”

Based upon this passage and what Paul wrote; we use the elders for such.

The Early Church knew where to go - they went to the Apostles. The Apostles went to St. Peter.

During the dispute in Antioch, they went to the Jerusalem Church. Paul went to the three pillars.

If the Catholic Bishops and the Pope are not their true successors, then where are their true successors, today?

I do not accept that a Pope and Catholic bishops persay are biblical.