Protestants, how can this be possible?

[jmcrae]

Close, but not quite. Are you familiar with the phrase “perception is reality”? This perhaps gets closer to it. For instance, let’s take a look at Luke’s comment below. (Or is it above? Given the way I’ve written this post it’s actually sort of both.)

Well, the Viola I lived in is part of the Sherrard school district, located on US 67 about 25 miles north of Monmouth in Mercer county about halfway between Alpha and Aledo. I think the “V” you are looking for in ROWVA is Victoria.

So, let’s examine this for “Truth”.

I happen to believe that there is an objective reality with regard to Truth. (Note, I believe this, not all persons believe it.) And therefore I am correcting Luke with regard to the identity and location of Viola. I’m pretty sure that I am right on this and that Luke will accept my judgment because though he sees himslef as familiar with these towns, I actually lived in the one under discussion.

However, when Luke posted he was obviously sure of himself enough to go ahead and post this material as fact. He didn’t post it just thinking that he knew this stuff. No, he posted knowing (in his own mind at least) this stuff. Thus from yesterday’s post until today it has been his reality, and also I would suspect yours and the reality of anyone else who cared to read this thread. Because, after all you got the information from an authoritative source, Luke, who personally was acquainted with that which he testified regarding. Yet while this was your reality this whole time, it was not mine. Therefore, for a time we had two different realities.

This is New Age baffle-gab. There were/are not “two realities.” One, if not both of you, is mistaken about what the V stands for.

Now, in this case we had two different realities (using the concept that perception is reality), but not two different truths – the objective truth of Viola’s location being not established by perception, but actual geography. Nonetheless. If you had been planning a trip to Viola, you might have contacted Luke, and he would have given you directions (at least general directions) and because you are a smart person you would have been confident that you could have found it. You would have planned your trip accordingly, and only on arrival would you have found out you were wrong. Or, because Viola is not far from the other communities mentioned in the ROWVA school district, you might have actually stumbled into Viola as you drove around in the general vicinity and thus actually had some confirmation that Luke had given you relatively good directions and you would have been even more convinced of the truth of his original statement.

Which has nothing to do with the acronym or what it stands for.

So, despite there being only one objective truth, reality would have been that folks were operating with different sets of internal truths. And you, in particular would actually be in the real Viola, while having been given directions there by one who did not know where the real Viola was. Very strange, but completely plausible.

It would be better to call them “perceptions” than “truths” I think.

Well, that is a sad illustration of what I am talking about, but one that does come from the practical and concrete world. When we move it to the realm of ideas, this becomes even more plausible. For instance, what is the #1 high school football team in the state of Illinois. Well, the answer depends on which sideline you are sitting. It doesn’t matter the score at the end of the game, everyone thinks that their team is #1.

Now we are getting into the realm of personal taste. “My favourite team” is not the same thing as “the number 1 team in the standings.”

Or at least that what they write in bright school colors on the windows of their cars as they head off to the games. And who is to say that they aren’t both true.

In the sense that their favourite team is X and our favourite team is Y, both can be true, since favourite team is a matter of personal taste combined with the physical location of where you reside. In order to maintain harmony with the neighbors, you root for the home team, even if you are reasonably sure they will lose the championship, because being in harmony with your neighbors is more important than being right about who will win the championship.

However, objectively, both team X and team Y can’t occupy the top of the standings, at the same time, and objectively, it is usually possible to predict who will win, based on who is playing better and more consistently. But you can choose the “wrong” team for a variety of very good reasons, most of which have nothing to do with objective reality, and everything to do with personal taste and with being accepted by the larger group. As an ordinary citizen, you throw your lot in with whatever the majority of your neighbors think, because in the end, it really doesn’t matter. A month after the series ends, only the most die-hard fans will remember the results, anyway.

But if you are laying a bet with real money, then you will want to use objective standards of truth to discern who is actually most likely to win, so that you can gain money back on your bet. Sometimes, this will mean betting against your own team.

It’s the same with religion. We’re betting our immortal souls that our perception and our feelings about religion correspond with the actual reality that God has set up for us.

If we bet wrongly, then we will be somewhat more permanently disappointed than the self-deluded fan who bets a couple of fins on his home team, and loses.

 

[luke1_28]

However, if you insist on only one truth, then know that we are right and you are wrong, because, just like in football, the home team is #1.

Truth is what HE is. Truth cannot be changed - only discovered more fully. Opinions - such as sentimental ones of holding a football team as #1 - are developed internally because of feelings and emotion - while it is true to you is still not stating correctly…it’s an opinion. While it may or may not be truth at all, it can be just an opinion for you if you have a losing record. Or even if it’s a winning record but you don’t have a Championship to show for it.

It would stand to reason by virtue of your arguments then, that opinions are what dictates the path of protestant thought as opposed to Truth. This would even more fully explain why there are so many splinters.

However, this is eternally dangerous. Because the Truth is Christ - all Truth has it’s origin in Christ. Authentic revelation of the Truth that makes it fuller, is only possible in one way. The Truth is only revealed most fully by the Teaching, Living Body that He endowed with the power to do so…His Church. (You have a problem with our belief in that …but if you lose the pride and use the logic…it will make sense soon…in the meantime, pray for humility please.)

It is true that splinter churches may squeak some Truth here and there…but even then they are only opinions because they FEEL them to be true and don’t KNOW them to be True. You can’t use the argument that because the Bible says so makes it TRUE…because Truth can’t be different. It has to be True or not true. Therefore, even the Bible can’t be your guide because your opinion of a passage may be different than another. For we all know the madness and arguments that occur when two protestants disagree with no one to settle the score. I saw it first hand at the pastor’s bbq. The pastor was up in arms about it. He didn’t know how to handle it. Because he too could see both sides. However, he had no ground to stand on and say listen…this is the way it is. Therefore, the TRUTH was lost in the opinion of what THEN became 3 peoples opinion. I think we have a better Holy Spirit than that and much less folly is needed.

To illustrate further…
A broken spirit and a contrite heart as you say, is what God requires. But that hasn’t anything to do with feelings and emotions if one is truly contrite, correct? Being sorry is different than feeling sorry. You should agree with this. Therefore, to be truly contrite, we have to know the Truth of what it is we are sorry for. True contrition is BEING sorry…not FEELING sorry…So what then are we to have a broken spirit and a contrite heart over? If there is not a single teaching authority that teaches us what to BE sorry about, BUT the Bible, then I cannot BE sorry for anything…BUT I CAN feel bad about birth control, or not. I CAN feel bad about abortion or not. I can feel bad about women ministers or not. I can feel bad about homosexuality or not. I can feel bad about a variety of different things that you may not feel bad about at all. True contrition is only True if we can KNOW what we are sorry for.

The fact of the matter is that the words of the Bible themselves can be the darkening of the glass. If Christ was so merciless that He never gave one single authority to be responsible in determining the meaning of these words, then the Word may be seen, as a contradiction in terms. The Truth will set your free. What Truth? My Truth or yours? On the contrary, Truth is meant to be known and if not loved, obeyed…and not like trying to play darts blindfolded.

Negotiation of Truth - creating “truths” or opinions is what will bring down the wrath of God sooner rather than later. The Israelites negotiated Truth - so much that even Aaron was in on the Golden Calf that seemed like a grand idea. God wasn’t enthused. David negotiated truth so much that he had the husband killed of a wife he coveted so he could marry her. Luther negotiated Truth so much that his truths saw him in another church and wound up the puppeteer of political motives. Maybe these people had at one time great intentions and were holy…but dude…they negotiated truth. And when that happens…we negotiate with Christ Himself. I myself, being the addict that I am, am an expert in negotiating Truth. Thou shall not becomes - Thou shall not, unless…or Thou shall not, but…

God required of me that the madness stop if I were to know Him they way HE wants me to know Him and not how I am comfortable in knowing Him. There are no buts but a Church! This is what the God of order and design intended…THIS prevents the chaos I created for myself. THIS SHOULD HAVE prevented the chaos the reformers released on the believers AND - unbelievers alike. They lost faith and in no way helped others build faith.

When one travels down that dark path of confusion, like the reformers did and their subsequent followers, no real Truth can ever be known as fully as it could be because of the habit of subjecting themselves to feelings and emotions that form opinions, and labeling that feeling or emotion as an inkling of “The Holy Spirit”.

There are those of protestant origin who have been given the grace to see that for 1500 years Truth was taught most fully in one place…just as Christ intended…and that after the actions of a few Truth negotiators a.k.a. reformers whose good intentions were wiped away by pride, that pride driven ‘reform’ changed the Church they sought to reform, into a church…their church but not THE Church. They wrestled with Truth but only their opinions were left of them. These opinions have been expounded upon and ratified numerous times…all to the detriment of Christ’s prayer of John 17.

…to be continued…



God bless,
luke1_28

 

[luke1_28]

…continued…

God hasn’t left His children to wander in the darkness like this. In order to see Him, we have to become like little children seeking Christ through the Church…we must trust in the office of the Pope and the Authority and power it is given. The guy may be a creep…but His power and authority remain. And in knowing the Truth as revealed to me by the Church - He is Risen and is Emmanuel…God with us. THE TRUTH tells me He is present everywhere in the world where there is a Tabernacle of the Catholic Church. THE TRUTH tells me that as we commune with Him, He communes with us. THE TRUTH tells me that the more we become one with Him, we become one more with the Truth allowing us to see the Truth yet more fully that our faith will allow us to see as we are taught it.

And to close, I don’t insist on one truth. I insist on One Truth as much as God will allow me to know HIM through His Church. Therefore, I know then that I will never be God enough to create a church…nor have the authority to make my opinions the basis of salvation for my followers. No…I have this Truth instead…I know that the Liturgy of the Church - the work of the Truth - provides no stage (or SHOULD NOT provide a stage) for proud human displays and performances to stir up feelings and emotions. I know that the most important structure in the Church is not a sound system, but an Altar. And I know that Altar is where the Lamb of God is brought to His people. Because I know it’s not enough just to read the Word as it is written, nor hear the Word taught in the Liturgy of the Word. I must consume the Word made flesh, in the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Truth on the Altar the becomes THE Truth in me as much as I allow it to be. Christ’s Perfect Sacrifice then is complete. I do not have to feel like I have just experienced Christ. I KNOW that I have by being more intimately united with Christ than I ever could through the preaching of a man.

Therefore, be right as you say…but without a foundation, the Church, it’s just an opinion.

God bless,
luke1_28

 

[luke1_28]

Close, but not quite. Are you familiar with the phrase “perception is reality”? This perhaps gets closer to it. For instance, let’s take a look at Luke’s comment below. (Or is it above? Given the way I’ve written this post it’s actually sort of both.)

Well, the Viola I lived in is part of the Sherrard school district, located on US 67 about 25 miles north of Monmouth in Mercer county about halfway between Alpha and Aledo. I think the “V” you are looking for in ROWVA is Victoria.

(continued)

You are right…my bad. There’s too many V town names in this area…there’s a Vermont too.

Crazy thing happened a couple weeks ago. Now I love football. Go Bears…Go Irish…Go BPCA Spartans…and because of sentimental reasons…Go Commandos. ANYWAY - I was standing on the BPCA sidelines on a Friday night at a game speaking to a friend of mine, also from Abingdon who graduated a year ahead of me in 87. He is a teacher now in Bushnell…and we were chatting about how Abingdon was playing Knoxville that night for the first time in 13 years…and here we were on that Friday night in Bushnell rooting for the Spartans. I wasn’t even there to watch anyone but rather took my boy to the game to ‘learn’ from the big boys. He was in JFL in his first year. I must admit- to watch the Commandos and the Blue Bullets clash in an old Prairieland match up that was dismantled 13 years ago would have been good. But the sacrifice was easy to be with my boy…to BE WITH my boy…, after I had been gone in a bottle all those years…it was great.

Our God is an awesome God. I owe Him and His Church…I owe my life…

God bless,
luke1_28

 

[mmmcounts]

You could very easily say: the standard for determining the #1 team in Illinois is the team that scored the most TDs, or the team that had the most “come from behind” wins, or the team that gave all of its concession stand profits to the homeless. Ok. Then, if that’s the standard, then the #1 team is ____. Let’s just declare what the standard is, then there’s absolutely no question, no room for “multiple truth realities”.

Aren’t all Christians playing for the same team? We’re number one, right- we worship the One True God?

Even assuming we do play for separate teams, though, who’s on the panel deciding who’s number one? Are you suggesting that we should just leave it to the Magisterium? I wonder how long it would take to hash that decision out…

Good luck getting all Christians on the planet on board with that plan.

 

[jmcrae]

Aren’t all Christians playing for the same team? We’re number one, right- we worship the One True God?

Even assuming we do play for separate teams, though, who’s on the panel deciding who’s number one?

God is. God will pick the Church that He created in 33 AD on the Rock of Peter.

Good luck getting all Christians on the planet on board with that plan.

It isn’t a popularity contest that anybody has to “get on board with.” God’s decision is permanently final, whether you or anyone else agrees with Him, or not. Even if the only Catholic left on the planet were the Pope, he would still be Peter’s Successor, according to God, even though no one else on earth agreed with God about that.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

God is.

Agreed. God is the TRUTH. It is not that we have truth, but that God IS Truth.

God will pick the Church that He created in 33 AD on the Rock of Peter.

If this were a True/False test, I would have to mark this one “false”.

The use of future tense is incorrect. God has already picked the Church.

He didn’t actually create the Church. The Church is simply another word for assembly. Those that he has assembled together to be the church were created by him before they were part of the church. So, the Church is the creation of his assemblying process. I suppose we could let this one go.

33 AD. That’s hard to back up. Since Jesus was most likely born sometime between 6 BC and 4 BC, that would meant that Jesus was 37-39 years of age at the time that God “created” the Church, excepting of course that most people believe that Jesus was crucified sometime around the age of 30-33 years, and therefore before 33 AD. If you believe that the Church came into existence during Jesus lifetime, then it also had to be prior to 33 AD. If you believe that it took place when the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples at Pentecost then it still had to be prior to 33 AD, for that event was only weeks after Jesus death. Either way, 33 AD would to too late for it to be either of these events. Thus you are claiming that there was no Church in Acts 2, and that is contrary to the teaching of scripture.

Or maybe you are just beginning to accept my idea of mutliple realities of truth. 33 AD works for you, even though it isn’t when it actually happened.

 

[jmcrae]

Agreed. God is the TRUTH. It is not that we have truth, but that God IS Truth.

If this were a True/False test, I would have to mark this one “false”.

The use of future tense is incorrect. God has already picked the Church.

He didn’t actually create the Church.

Well, He claims to be creating it, in Matthew 16:18-19. (Are you one of those people who thinks that the Bible doesn’t accurately record what Jesus said?)

The Church is simply another word for assembly. Those that he has assembled together to be the church were created by him before they were part of the church. So, the Church is the creation of his assemblying process. I suppose we could let this one go.

Jesus was the focal point around whom the first Christians assembled, so I would call that the first Christian Church. It’s clear in Matthew 16 that Jesus intended for that same “assembly” (Church) to continue on after His death.

33 AD. That’s hard to back up. Since Jesus was most likely born sometime between 6 BC and 4 BC, that would meant that Jesus was 37-39 years of age at the time that God “created” the Church, excepting of course that most people believe that Jesus was crucified sometime around the age of 30-33 years, and therefore before 33 AD.

Could be. Of course, if we want to get really technical, I think it was St. Irenaeus who thought that Jesus died at the age of 50. There is also the problem of whether His ministry to the Apostles lasted one year, or three.

However, you and I both knew what I meant when I said “33 AD”. It’s not a “second reality” but rather, just a shorthand way of referring to the events of Holy Week and the 50 Days, in whatever year it turns out they took place in.

If you believe that the Church came into existence during Jesus lifetime, then it also had to be prior to 33 AD.

Given your parameters, that’s quite true. Probably 27 AD, although saying “27 AD” doesn’t have quite the same “power of shorthand” that saying “33 AD” does, even though 27 AD is likely to be more accurate. Unless St. Irenaeus was right about Him dying at the age of 50, in which case we are looking at something like 44 AD - which shortens St. Peter’s reign by eleven years, but still keeps him in as the longest-reigning Pontiff.

Or maybe you are just beginning to accept my idea of mutliple realities of truth.

It isn’t a “multiple reality”. It’s just an easily-recognized shorthand symbol for “the events of Holy Week and the 50 Days” - all of which occurred in the same reality in which we live today, in pretty much any year except 33 AD.

 

[PRmerger]

Agreed. God is the TRUTH. It is not that we have truth, but that God IS Truth.

Why do you say that we don’t have truth? How do you as a Christian minister propose to tell your congregation that?

If this were a True/False test, I would have to mark this one “false”.

The use of future tense is incorrect. God has already picked the Church.

Now that’s funny, coming from an advocate of “multiple truth realities”!

The Church is simply another word for assembly. Those that he has assembled together to be the church were created by him before they were part of the church. So, the Church is the creation of his assemblying process.

Now, here’s an example of a both/and. Yep, the church is an assembly, but it’s also the body of Christ. It’s also the Bride of Christ. It’s also a building. It’s also the Magisterium. It’s also the people in the pews. It’s not either/or.

33 AD works for you, even though it isn’t when it actually happened.

Fair enough.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Well, He claims to be creating it, in Matthew 16:18-19. (Are you one of those people who thinks that the Bible doesn’t accurately record what Jesus said?)

I see the word “build”, not “create” in that passage. There is a difference between them. Admittedly, people use the term “create” for many things that they don’t create, things that they just construct out of other things that are already created. If that is what you mean by saying that Jesus “created” the church, then so be it. That is also recognition that the elements which became the Church were existent prior to the church. In other words the Church was not created ex nihilo.

Such is playing fast and loose with terms. Such as your preference for 33 AD over 27 AD as the dating for the “creation” of the Church. I’m wondering then if you aren’t playing as fast and loose with the identity of the Church itself.

I submit to you that the Church is composed of ALL persons who belong to Christ, and is much more than just a subsection of that group which considers itself under the temporal authority of the Holy See in Rome. Christ may have built this assembly of people who belonged to him on his good friend “Rock.” But the actual nature of the assembly is dependent not on one’s connection to Rock, but on one’s connection to Christ. We are after all Christians, not Peterians. Even before Rock passed away, we see that there were other leaders among the assembled followers of Jesus, people who had authority in the assembly besides Rock. They were also part of the building process, just as Rock was. And let us remember that Rock was indeed just apart of the process, not the whole embodiment of it. Rock was certainly not the cornerstone of what was being built; rather, Christ himself was and still is the chief cornerstone. Thus, the central figure of the Church is Jesus, not Peter. And our connection to Jesus is through his indwelling Holy Spirit, not by allegiance to the supremecy of the interpretation of a persons (or group of persons) who set themselves up as the sole arbitraters of the faith…

 

[jmcrae]

I submit to you that the Church is composed of ALL persons who belong to Christ, and is much more than just a subsection of that group which considers itself under the temporal authority of the Holy See in Rome.

All who belong to Christ are in the care of His appointed Shepherd. See John 21:15-19.

Christ may have built this assembly of people who belonged to him on his good friend “Rock.” But the actual nature of the assembly is dependent not on one’s connection to Rock, but on one’s connection to Christ.

One connects to Christ by means of His Church. It’s kind of the “telephone wire” that runs between ourselves and Him.

We are after all Christians, not Peterians. Even before Rock passed away, we see that there were other leaders among the assembled followers of Jesus, people who had authority in the assembly besides Rock. They were also part of the building process, just as Rock was. And let us remember that Rock was indeed just apart of the process, not the whole embodiment of it.

He was the center point. “I went to meet with Cephas (Peter)” has a significance to it - it’s not just a random Twitter from St. Paul. They weren’t just having a good gossip over tea and crumpets. St. Peter was actually authorizing St. Paul to preach and teach in the Church. “I went to see Cephas” means that he has been authorized, and that people need to listen to him.

Rock was certainly not the cornerstone of what was being built; rather, Christ himself was and still is the chief cornerstone. Thus, the central figure of the Church is Jesus, not Peter. And our connection to Jesus is through his indwelling Holy Spirit, not by allegiance to the supremecy of the interpretation of a persons (or group of persons) who set themselves up as the sole arbitraters of the faith.

The Holy Spirit isn’t something separate from the Church. Rather, it is the soul of the Church - what keeps it alive.

 

[PJM]

=mmmcounts;5802525]Aren’t all Christians playing for the same team? We’re number one, right- we worship the One True God?

Even assuming we do play for separate teams, though, who’s on the panel deciding who’s number one? Are you suggesting that we should just leave it to the Magisterium? I wonder how long it would take to hash that decision out…

Good luck getting all Christians on the planet on board with that plan.

Actually I’m not intirely sure all Christians are on the “same team?”

Being NUMBER ONE for the same of being number one, seeks to lacl revelance on this Forum?

However being associated with the One Church actually Founded by Christ is profoundly signifiant, and yet, regullarly overlooked

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[luke1_28]

I see the word “build”, not “create” in that passage. There is a difference between them. Admittedly, people use the term “create” for many things that they don’t create, things that they just construct out of other things that are already created. If that is what you mean by saying that Jesus “created” the church, then so be it. That is also recognition that the elements which became the Church were existent prior to the church. In other words the Church was not created ex nihilo.

Such is playing fast and loose with terms. Such as your preference for 33 AD over 27 AD as the dating for the “creation” of the Church. I’m wondering then if you aren’t playing as fast and loose with the identity of the Church itself.

I submit to you that the Church is composed of ALL persons who belong to Christ, and is much more than just a subsection of that group which considers itself under the temporal authority of the Holy See in Rome. Christ may have built this assembly of people who belonged to him on his good friend “Rock.” But the actual nature of the assembly is dependent not on one’s connection to Rock, but on one’s connection to Christ. We are after all Christians, not Peterians. Even before Rock passed away, we see that there were other leaders among the assembled followers of Jesus, people who had authority in the assembly besides Rock. They were also part of the building process, just as Rock was. And let us remember that Rock was indeed just apart of the process, not the whole embodiment of it. Rock was certainly not the cornerstone of what was being built; rather, Christ himself was and still is the chief cornerstone. Thus, the central figure of the Church is Jesus, not Peter. And our connection to Jesus is through his indwelling Holy Spirit, not by allegiance to the supremecy of the interpretation of a persons (or group of persons) who set themselves up as the sole arbitraters of the faith…

The New Testament Church is the fulfillment of the Old Testament customs. The closest to Christ’s True Church will resemble Jewish worship customs. Christ was Jewish and so were his disciples. They themselves became fulfilled Jews. Therefore what form of worship did they practice? A read of the Church Fathers will tell you…Liturgical Church (detailed vestments, altar, temple, tabernacle, PRESCRIBED) worship. It’s all about covenantal family relationships between the Father and His children. Christ prescribed something Himself in this fulfilled form or worship. Christ celebrated a sacrifice of Love of Himself - He held His own Body and in His hands to give to his disciples. How beautiful is that?

Therefore if you don’t have a priest ordained by Apostolic Succession, or an altar, or a Victim, or a Sacrifice of that Victim, or no one consumes the Sacrifice - you don’t have True Worship. You have instead - a man made concoction of prayer and Bible reading. Since someone of Apostolic Succession is required to correctly interpret Scripture, then that’s just best effort in any other Church but - the Holy Catholic Church as instituted by Christ Himself.

How can I be so sure? Read your history and not some commentary or opinion.

God bless,
luke1_28

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Luke and jmcrae, I think that you are giving credence to things that are not meant to be interepreted and understood in the manner that you have. However, you have reached your opinion, and it still is Christian. The question that began this thread is: “Protestants, how can this be possible?” You can fill in almost anything subsequent to complete the question as to what it is that protestants feel, do, understand that it is different from Catholics and the answer eventaully gets back to the same-- we simply feel like you have chased down a rabbit trail and created an additional layer of authority beyond that which Jesus himself instituted. But I don’t believe it makes you any less Chistian. And if following the pope eventually leads you to Jesus Christ, then praise be to God for the Catholic Church!! Just don’t expect me to recognize it as the exclusive purveyor of the grace of God in the world, for I think that Christ, his Church and his body can be found outside of that particular institution as well. And just as some seem to find him better within the Catholic Church, some of us find him better outside of the ministries of the Catholic Church. And it is possible because we believe that God himself ordained it that way.

 

[PJM]

; Luke and jmcrae, I think that you are giving credence to things that are not meant to be interpreted and understood in the manner that you have. However, you have reached your opinion, and it still is Christian. The question that began this thread is: “Protestants, how can this be possible?” You can fill in almost anything subsequent to complete the question as to what it is that protestants feel, do, understand that it is different from Catholics and the answer eventually gets back to the same-- we simply feel like you have chased down a rabbit trail and created an additional layer of authority beyond that which Jesus himself instituted. But I don’t believe it makes you any less Christian. And if following the pope eventually leads you to Jesus Christ, then praise be to God for the Catholic Church!! Just don’t expect me to recognize it as the exclusive purveyor of the grace of God in the world, for I think that Christ, his Church and his body can be found outside of that particular institution as well. And just as some seem to find him better within the Catholic Church, some of us find him better outside of the ministries of the Catholic Church. And it is possible because we believe that God himself ordained it that way.

Greetings GraceSeeker,

If this were baseball you just ‘struck out "

I’d like to affirm the teachings that both my friend luke1_28, and jmcrae expressed indeed conform to the old age Teachings of the Catholic Church.

Our Catholic Tradition almost by necessity is based on Jewish Religious practices as the Apostles [except Luke] and Jesus Himself were raised in the Jewish Religious Traditions. As “One cannot share what does not possess” this evident application of practice seems inevitable.

Point one: As the Original author of this OPQ, my point has yet to be answered, and as it applies to some you’re above comments; for the record I will restate it again.

Both the Catholic and the King James Bible include the writing of 2: Tim. 3:16. “[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

We assume that because “you” chose freely to keep it in you’re version of our bible, that you agree with it and hold it to be true? The key words here are: “ALL” and “Scripture.”

My question, yet to be answered is on what grounds, what authority did the Revolutionist. Luther, Calvin Ect. Have to remove seven entire books from the Divinely inspired and at the time, about 1000 year old Catholic Bible, and further on what authority did these same men use to justify changing numerous verses to support there new religion?

You’re first statement of “creating an authority” not intended by Christ is clearly anti-biblical. Here are but a half dozen examples proving you wrong. Mt. 16: 15-19, Eph. 4:1-7, Lk.22:28, Lk.28:19-20, 2 Tim. 4:1-4, Eph.2: 19-20, Eph. 3:9-10 and the fact that the term “The Church [SINGULAR] appears some 37 times in the NT, which is supports by vast amounts of historical evidence.

You seem to gloss-over friend that the Bible was and is a Catholic Book. Compiled and written [NT] by men we today know as Catholics, FOR THIS ONE very Catholic CHURCH!

Indeed Christ is spiritually present outside of the Catholic Church, However He is only Physically Present as well as Spiritually Present in His One Catholic Church!

For you to claim to be members of “the same” church is to imply that because we both have hands, you have MY fingers. Not so! We have the Seven Sacraments all instituted by Christ, we have Christ Real Presence, We have the Full and entire Bible as Divinely intended by God Himself.

And it is because of these facts friend that Catholic [at least should] be speaking in unison as we have but One Teaching authority. The Catholic Church.

Not only is this position solidly Biblical, it is equally logical. The bible friend is the “Mission Statement” of the Catholic Church. It is inconceivable, impossible that the CC could have lasted 2000 years, and grown as it has, without a structure of Governance put in place, and also the Guiding presence of the Holy Spirit, and Christ personally pledging Himself for it’s truthful message, and in fact the single source of TRUTH on all matters of Faith and Morals.

Friend, read by signature quote. You’re personal opinion is trumped by Christ Single truth, which quite logically He placed in the only Church He Founded.

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[jmcrae]

And it is possible because we believe that God himself ordained it that way.

Are you trying to say that God will change reality itself out of consideration for your beliefs?

I find no evidence in Scripture for any “make it up as you go” religion being accepted by God.

By contrast, I find Christ praying for His One Church in John 17, that they remain unified, I find throughout the New Testament, Jesus training and exhorting the 12 to prepare them for the leadership of the Church, I find St. Peter being given the Keys to the House of David, oh sorry I mean the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 16:18-19), and I find Jesus appointing Peter to be the Chief Shepherd of the Church (John 21:15-19) all of which is reaffirmed throughout the Book of Acts, and the rest of the New Testament.

 

[luke1_28]

Luke and jmcrae, I think that you are giving credence to things that are not meant to be interepreted and understood in the manner that you have. However, you have reached your opinion, and it still is Christian. The question that began this thread is: “Protestants, how can this be possible?” You can fill in almost anything subsequent to complete the question as to what it is that protestants feel, do, understand that it is different from Catholics and the answer eventaully gets back to the same-- we simply feel like you have chased down a rabbit trail and created an additional layer of authority beyond that which Jesus himself instituted. But I don’t believe it makes you any less Chistian. And if following the pope eventually leads you to Jesus Christ, then praise be to God for the Catholic Church!! Just don’t expect me to recognize it as the exclusive purveyor of the grace of God in the world, for I think that Christ, his Church and his body can be found outside of that particular institution as well. And just as some seem to find him better within the Catholic Church, some of us find him better outside of the ministries of the Catholic Church. And it is possible because we believe that God himself ordained it that way.

If Christ Himself told you that the Father in the Old Testament prescribed a form of worship for His children, would you believe Christ? If Christ told you He was a Jew, would you believe Him? If He told you He came to perfectly practice and fulfill the Law and not abolish it, would you believe Him? If Christ’s disciples told you they were Jews following Christ who is fulfilling the Law, would you believe them?

Since you would logically answer yes because that is all scripturally based, then why can’t you logically deduce that because of the directives of a good and orderly God, He would only want one Church and that His Son ONLY had the authority and power to start it? And that the Church Christ founded was founded with the intentions of there being only one Church because His Father is not a Father of chaos and confusion? That THIS Church that Christ founded would have elements from the Old Testament - priest, altar, victim, sacrifice, consuming the sacrifice - because Christ came to fulfill the Law as He said He would? True Christians worship God the Father as the Father intended like the fulfilled Jews that they are! For Christ is the Lamb of God - that takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those that are called to His Supper! He is the spotless and unblemished sacrifice offering Himself up for AND TO His Bride - the Church.

The problem with all protestants is that you ‘think’ and ‘feel’ and ‘surmise’ but you do not know. You cannot know. This is why there are multiple disagreements and no one among the protestants can put their foot down and say THIS is the right way. But you can know the Truth - and IT WILL SET YOU FREE - instead of feel your way through this journey of life. You can know the fullness of The Truth. But - Only the Pope can know, the Magisterium can know, and all the Church professing the Creed can know without a doubt the Truth most fully revealed through Christ’s Church. Christ set it up that way - so we don’t have to feel and surmise around in the dark…wondering if we got it right.

I don’t think Christ is alive NOW - in His Resurrected Body and we Catholics have access to Him most fully in the Holy Eucharist. I know it. I don’t think He is the Word of God AND the Word of God made flesh. ** I know it.** I don’t think He is the spotless, unblemished Lamb of God! ** I know it. ** I don’t think He is The Eternal Sacrifice that the ordained priesthood, with it’s roots in the Old Testament, brings to us in the New Covenant. I know it.

The amount you let God love and commune with YOU, is restricted by pride in your unfortunate ignorance handed on to you BY TRADITION by YOUR church founders. Your roots start with Calvin, Wesley, Luther! Mere men. You are a victim by tradition, ironically, of their errors. Don’t let flesh and blood reveal the Truth to you. Let God the Father in Heaven reveal it to you through HIS Church!

The True Faith of the Founding Fathers handed down through the ages by Apostolic Succession is where you will find the Truth most fully. Because the whole Bible - ALL OF IT - is testimony that the reformation was WRONG. For the whole Bible - from the beginning to end - points to the Father preparing the world for, Christ giving witness to, and the Holy Spirit giving the Church power and authority to “Do this in remembrance of Me.” The Holy Bible is the record of man being prepared to receive the Holy Eucharist. For Christ did not just come to die and rise - He came to serve by giving Himself in as a Holy Sacrifice that must be consumed.

Just don’t expect me to recognize it as the exclusive purveyor of the grace of God in the world,

The Catholic Church is the **exclusive purveyor **of THE HOLY EUCHARIST - which is the Perfect Sacrifice that gives SANCTIFYING Grace to God’s children through communion in Christ!

I cannot rightly expect anything of you as a protestant. He gave you a free will just as He gave the disciples in John 6 who turned away. He didn’t run after them. While I don’t run after you to try to correct, change what Christ said, I do run after you with the Love of Christ to tell you Christ wants YOU to commune with HIM - in the way Christ most fully expresses His intimate Love - through the Holy Eucharist. Can you not let Christ love you that much? Can you not GIVE like Christ gave?

for I think that Christ, his Church and his body can be found outside of that particular institution as well.

Christ founded one Church. This One Church is given the power and authority to teach The Word of God. You can find it if you take off the blinders you were trained to use by mislead men. You will identify it as the Church that has the priest, altar, victim, sacrifice, and God’s children consuming the Sacrifice - is where you can find the True Worship God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as God intended in the Old Testament and fulfills in the New Testament…The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

…anything else is just man made!

Come home!

God bless,
luke1_28

 

[PJM]

=luke1_28;5816602]If Christ Himself told you that the Father in the Old Testament prescribed a form of worship for His children, would you believe Christ? If Christ told you He was a Jew, would you believe Him? If He told you He came to perfectly practice and fulfill the Law and not abolish it, would you believe Him? If Christ’s disciples told you they were Jews following Christ who is fulfilling the Law, would you believe them?

Since you would logically answer yes because that is all scripturally based, then why can’t you logically deduce that because of the directives of a good and orderly God, He would only want one Church and that His Son ONLY had the authority and power to start it? And that the Church Christ founded was founded with the intentions of there being only one Church because His Father is not a Father of chaos and confusion? That THIS Church that Christ founded would have elements from the Old Testament - priest, altar, victim, sacrifice, consuming the sacrifice - because Christ came to fulfill the Law as He said He would? True Christians worship God the Father as the Father intended like the fulfilled Jews that they are! For Christ is the Lamb of God - that takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those that are called to His Supper! He is the spotless and unblemished sacrifice offering Himself up for AND TO His Bride - the Church.

The problem with all protestants is that you ‘think’ and ‘feel’ and ‘surmise’ but you do not know. You cannot know. This is why there are multiple disagreements and no one among the protestants can put their foot down and say THIS is the right way. But you can know the Truth - and IT WILL SET YOU FREE - instead of feel your way through this journey of life. You can know the fullness of The Truth. But - Only the Pope can know, the Magisterium can know, and all the Church professing the Creed can know without a doubt the Truth most fully revealed through Christ’s Church. Christ set it up that way - so we don’t have to feel and surmise around in the dark…wondering if we got it right.

I don’t think Christ is alive NOW - in His Resurrected Body and we Catholics have access to Him most fully in the Holy Eucharist. I know it. I don’t think He is the Word of God AND the Word of God made flesh. ** I know it.** I don’t think He is the spotless, unblemished Lamb of God! ** I know it. ** I don’t think He is The Eternal Sacrifice that the ordained priesthood, with it’s roots in the Old Testament, brings to us in the New Covenant. I know it.

The amount you let God love and commune with YOU, is restricted by pride in your unfortunate ignorance handed on to you BY TRADITION by YOUR church founders. Your roots start with Calvin, Wesley, Luther! Mere men. You are a victim by tradition, ironically, of their errors. Don’t let flesh and blood reveal the Truth to you. Let God the Father in Heaven reveal it to you through HIS Church!

The True Faith of the Founding Fathers handed down through the ages by Apostolic Succession is where you will find the Truth most fully. Because the whole Bible - ALL OF IT - is testimony that the reformation was WRONG. For the whole Bible - from the beginning to end - points to the Father preparing the world for, Christ giving witness to, and the Holy Spirit giving the Church power and authority to “Do this in remembrance of Me.” The Holy Bible is the record of man being prepared to receive the Holy Eucharist. For Christ did not just come to die and rise - He came to serve by giving Himself in as a Holy Sacrifice that must be consumed.

The Catholic Church is the **exclusive purveyor **of THE HOLY EUCHARIST - which is the Perfect Sacrifice that gives SANCTIFYING Grace to God’s children through communion in Christ!

I cannot rightly expect anything of you as a protestant. He gave you a free will just as He gave the disciples in John 6 who turned away. He didn’t run after them. While I don’t run after you to try to correct, change what Christ said, I do run after you with the Love of Christ to tell you Christ wants YOU to commune with HIM - in the way Christ most fully expresses His intimate Love - through the Holy Eucharist. Can you not let Christ love you that much? Can you not GIVE like Christ gave?

Christ founded one Church. This One Church is given the power and authority to teach The Word of God. You can find it if you take off the blinders you were trained to use by mislead men. You will identify it as the Church that has the priest, altar, victim, sacrifice, and God’s children consuming the Sacrifice - is where you can find the True Worship God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as God intended in the Old Testament and fulfills in the New Testament…The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

…anything else is just man made!

Come home!

God bless,
luke1_28

Thanks luke1_28, Keep up the great work!

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[luke1_28]

“There is one God, and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair, by our Lord’s voice founded upon Peter. To set up another altar, or to constitute another priesthood, besides the one altar and the one priesthood, is impossible. Whosever gathereth elsewhere scattereth. It is adulterous, it is impious, it is sacrilegious, whatsoever is instituted by man to the breach of God’s disposition. Get ye far from such men: they are blind, and leaders of the blind…” St. Cyprian

From Wikipedia: (note the time St. Cyprian lived)

Saint Cyprian (Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus) (died September 14, 258) was bishop of Carthage and an important early Christian writer. He was born around the beginning of the 3rd century in North Africa, perhaps at Carthage, where he received an excellent classical education. After converting to Christianity, he became a bishop (249) and eventually died a martyr at Carthage.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Greetings GraceSeeker,

If this were baseball you just ‘struck out "

You’re not the umpire. God is. And the only call I’ve ever heard him make is “safe” at home.

I’d like to affirm the teachings that both my friend luke1_28, and jmcrae expressed indeed conform to the old age Teachings of the Catholic Church.

I’m sure they do. That doesn’t mean squat with either me or God.

Our Catholic Tradition almost by necessity is based on Jewish Religious practices as the Apostles [except Luke] and Jesus Himself were raised in the Jewish Religious Traditions. As “One cannot share what does not possess” this evident application of practice seems inevitable.

No problem. The Jesus I worship was himself a devout Jew, though he never asked us to become Jews ourselves. Instead he offers us a new covenant doing God’s will not as defined by the old covenant, but by Jesus who declared that we should “Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.” In fact it is “By this (not baptism, not the eucharist, not church membership) all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

Point one: As the Original author of this OPQ, my point has yet to be answered, and as it applies to some you’re above comments; for the record I will restate it again.

Both the Catholic and the King James Bible include the writing of 2: Tim. 3:16. “[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

We assume that because “you” chose freely to keep it in you’re version of our bible, that you agree with it and hold it to be true? The key words here are: “ALL” and “Scripture.”

My question, yet to be answered is on what grounds, what authority did the Revolutionist. Luther, Calvin Ect. Have to remove seven entire books from the Divinely inspired and at the time, about 1000 year old Catholic Bible, and further on what authority did these same men use to justify changing numerous verses to support there new religion?

You say that the question is yet to be answered. That is not true. Rather, the answers that have been supplied you have yet to find convincing. I and others have shared why. You can accept or reject your reasons. But you have received them, even if you haven’t bothered to take the time to listen.

You’re first statement of “creating an authority” not intended by Christ is clearly anti-biblical. Here are but a half dozen examples proving you wrong. Mt. 16: 15-19, Eph. 4:1-7, Lk.22:28, Lk.28:19-20, 2 Tim. 4:1-4, Eph.2: 19-20, Eph. 3:9-10 and the fact that the term “The Church [SINGULAR] appears some 37 times in the NT, which is supports by vast amounts of historical evidence.

You have a uniquely biased interpretation regarding the meaning of those passages. I don’t think that they point to what you claim they point to at all. As regards the term “the Church”, it doesn’t appear even once in scripture – “ecclesia” does, and you would do well to learn its meaning in the context in which it was written which is quite different than how you are reading into it today.

You seem to gloss-over friend that the Bible was and is a Catholic Book. Compiled and written [NT] by men we today know as Catholics, FOR THIS ONE very Catholic CHURCH!

Gloss over. No. I don’t gloss over that idea, I outright deny it!!

Indeed Christ is spiritually present outside of the Catholic Church…

Stop there. Don’t continue on with the rest. The rest may even be true, but it is irrelevant. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is the one Church, apostolic and universal. That’s all we really need to know to define the Church. That is all that is essential and in this essential we have unity. In the non-essentials we do not, but in them we can have liberty – you to be Catholc and me to be catholic.