.
.
.
There are divisions in the catholic church as well orthodox catholics claim to be the one true church and the roman catholics are not. There are arguments about the authority of the pope between thease two, about purgatory, Mary. I was told by one orthodox priest that the roman catholic church has corrupted itself down through the ages. One discounts the other. I believe all need to look more at Jesus and what He says and do that . I wonder if we can see how poor we really are.
I am afraid that I am not doing a good job of answering your question
No, you are not you get me hung up on the point that always hangs me up, basically it is the reason for the large amount of protestant denominations is or has to be that most were not actually inspired by the holy spirit. Who is correct and who is wrong? how do you know? Because the holy spirit inspires you? what if both of us, you and I pray hard for guidance , for the holy spirit to lead us to the correct denomination that the HS inspires, and you say Baptist and I say Lutheran?
I hear this claim all the time, there are differances in the RCC. I do not ever find anyone posting what these are where they occur and what/who is involved, only the claim never any facts.
We are able to know the distinctions between the orthodox church and the RCC. therefore I give you, or concede that division, the others I do not. So one division within the catholic church family, 33,000 or more among protestants. I never understood for instance John Wesley, he is a member of the church of England and then he founded the Methodists religion, why? what led him or inspired him or why the need? And why/how did his followers join him so that it grew into a large denomination?
Martin Luther, I have a hard time even going there, he was such a tortured man with so many demons, he so often attacked those close to him who he thought were not bowing down to his authority or giving him credit for what was occurring. Also would you not agree that a lot of what occurred involving Luther had to do with the peasants revolution against the royalty? Ig you take the civil disobediance out of the equasion Luther would not have had much of a revolution. I find it hard to follow anyone whose basis for his search for new meaning is his not feeling the old meanings were providing for his salvation, my point being, I would rather believe an institution that has a long record of success(the church, even with its human faults and there were and or those faults based upon the fact the organistion is made up of humans,) than someone who says I had questions about my salvation and here’s what I came up with its a better version than what has been taught for 1500 years.
I also always ask and never get an answe =r who was it that preserved what you claim is the tradition of the church that is true from the time of the apostles until the time of the protestant revolution? I have never, ever been given an answer as to the person or persons, the organisation how it was done has been explained to my in very vauge general terms but never one name a place where the person lived or any organisation wheere it was located who founded it who was a member?
If htis group or succession of individuals existed as claimed by protestants to get around the where were these churchs for the 1500 years before the protestant revolution, then ther must be some history, some knowledge of them, of when where who, I have never ever been told about one, only that they were constantly burned at the stake by the church. it always has been to me a straw argument, the fact is lets say there was a small group of 150 people that was amintained, throughout the ages from the time of the apostles till the reformation, what would that tell us, the 150 would have been what Christ left to keep safe his true message for the world and not the millions of the RCC? that makes no sense to anyone.
I am glad you agree that private interpretation is wrong, however, the baptist church I grew up in taught private interpretation and many denominations also do. The problem with both private interpretation and your view is who is doing the interpretation? The RCC and its history is who I follow, exactly whpis providing interpretation for the over 33000 ? It certainly cant be someone everyone is agreeing on. You say it is the holy spirit but how do you address the argument involving the holy spirit has inspired 33,000 diferent interpretations? who decides which of these are truly the inspired interpretation and which are false? Does it come from Salt lake City? Little Rock? South Carolina? Where?
You do realize each of the 33,000 have significantly enough differances to call themselves a different name? Sometimes not great differances but differances.
Lastly, I’m sorry, I do not see Gods hand in the protestant movement. I sometimes on Sunday morning turn the tv, satalitte dish to the series of channels featuring religion. I can go back to back and find protestant pasters teaching on the same verse and teaching different meanings that contradict each other. I readily admit the Bible can be interpreted different ways, thats why private interpretation is dangerous, thats why the RCCis important and why is has survived these centuries.
I will stop for now but end where I began, yes your post confuses me as to what you are saying or your explanation of protestants. I’m sorry I dont agree but I believe the RCC is the true church founded by Christ, I agree salvation can be obtained outside the church, we dont say who is in who is out, God does, but I believe our doctrine, dogma and beliefs are those entrusted to us by Jesus.
But my father, who was Catholic, and mother both drink even though the entire Church thinks drinking is a sin.
