Protestants: please stop using the label "Bible-believing"

[ufamtobie]

If you are a believer and In Christ you are part of His Church. Its not a exclusive club.

Hisalone,

Satan is a believer in Christ, and yet he is not part of the Church. And yes you can say that the Catholic Church is a Exclusive Club, the Club house of Jesus Christ that is, and I praise and thank Jesus Christ that through his grace that I am a part of this Exclusive Membership of the Club House of Jesus Christ, that has been founded on ROCK.

Hisalone, don’t you want to become a member of this Exclusive Club or do you want to remain outside looking in and talking bad about it.

Ufam Tobie

 

[po18guy]

Hi there!

The early Church was indeed “catholic.” However, this should be differentiated from the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, and this is well-known, there are “Catholic” churches which are not Roman, such as the Eastern and Greek Orthodox. These churches are not under the pope for they have their own patriarchs. The problem arose when the Bishop of Rome declared himself pope and infallible to the exclusion of the other patriarchates, which were Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, etc. So it would indeed be arrogant to say that the Roman Catholic Church is the only One True Church which Christ founded to the exclusion of all the other Christian churches.

By the way, a lot of the Protestant reformers were Catholic priests, so it can also be argued, using your reasoning, that Protestantism also traces its lineage to Christ and the apostles.

Disregarding the inaccuracies in your history, what alarms me more is that your opinion appears to justify, even to desire division in the body of Christ. Where is that in the bible?

The Holy Spirit unites
The demon divides

 

[Bengoshi]

Janet,

Scripture puts oral (non enscripturated) traditions of an apostle on the same footing as what has been enscripturated.[2 thes 2:15]

I agree! However, all the apostles are now long dead and gone!

 

[po18guy]

I agree! However, all the apostles are now long dead and gone!

Just wondering: Are you Iglesia ni Cristo?

 

[guanophore]

There is no pope or concept of pope in the bible. Christ did not establish a pope.

To an extent this makes sense. Christ established a chief shepherd over His flock. He passed his authority to the Apostles, and they to their successors, the bishops. The Successor of Peter came to reside in Rome, where Peter was martryd. He was known as the “first among equals”. When the primary language of the region changed from Greek to Latin, the term “Pope” (papa) was given affectionately to the successor of Peter.

Jesus established the Apostles in His authority in order to maintain unity in His Body. The successor of Peter has become the symbol of that unity all over the world. Christians are either in unity with him, or not.

Jesus charged Peter with the responsibility of feeding and caring for the flock, and gave him the keys to the kingdom. He grafted Simon into His own “rockness” to make Peter a rock as well.

 

[po18guy]

I agree! However, all the apostles are now long dead and gone!

First of all, God is not God of the dead, but of the living, for to Him, all are alive (Luke 20:38) Witness the transfiguration (Matthew 17:1, Mark 9:2, and Luke 9:28 and following) where both Moses and Elijah were revealed to be alive. The Apostles appointed successors. Where it that in the bible? Acts 1:15-26, the replacement of Judas with Matthias. Peter quoted Psalm 109:8 when he stated “let another take his office”. It has continued to this day.

 

[Bengoshi]

Just wondering: Are you Iglesia ni Cristo?

LOL! Of course not! Doesn’t it say in my profile that I’m an Evengelical Christian? I am not a member of that cult, the INC, which is a newer version of Arianism. They deny the deity of Christ despite their continuous practice of worshipping Him.

 

[Bengoshi]

First of all, God is not God of the dead, but of the living, for to Him, all are alive (Luke 20:38) Witness the transfiguration (Matthew 17:1, Mark 9:2, and Luke 9:28 and following) where both Moses and Elijah were revealed to be alive. The Apostles appointed successors. Where it that in the bible? Acts 1:15-26, the replacement of Judas with Matthias. Peter quoted Psalm 109:8 when he stated “let another take his office”. It has continued to this day.

So what is your point? We are speaking from our point of view, not God’s. Do you see any spirit of any apostle wandering about? Moreover, there was the requirement that for someone to be qualified as an apostle, he must have seen and travelled with Christ, such as Mathias, the one who replaced Judas. Could that be said of any of the Roman Catholic popes or bishops? Of course not!

 

[benedictus2]

That’s funny, Ephesians 5:23 says that Jesus is the head of the church, not Peter and Ephesians 5:24 says that the church is subject to the authority of Christ, not Peter.

True. Jesus is the head of the of th Church because the Church is the Body of Christ. But stewardship was given to Peter. And Jesus GAVE the authority to Peter.

Matthew 16:13-19
13 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”
14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

John 21: 15-17
15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” 16 He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” (Jesus) said to him, "Feed my sheep.

 

[Hisalone]

Hisalone,

Satan is a believer in Christ, and yet he is not part of the Church. And yes you can say that the Catholic Church is a Exclusive Club, the Club house of Jesus Christ that is, and I praise and thank Jesus Christ that through his grace that I am a part of this Exclusive Membership of the Club House of Jesus Christ, that has been founded on ROCK.

Hisalone, don’t you want to become a member of this Exclusive Club or do you want to remain outside looking in and talking bad about it.

Ufam Tobie

Satan beleives that Jesus is the Christ, Satan does not **believe in **Jesus there is the difference. I am in Christ and therefore part of His body and a memeber of His Church. you can not seperate Him from me as muc as you would like to.

 

[benedictus2]

If you are a believer and In Christ you are part of His Church. Its not a exclusive club.

Jesus only has one Church, the Catholic Church. Believing is not enough. You have to be incorporated into His Church.

You are right IT IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE CLUB. Everyone is welcome. If you decide right here and now to join you will not be refused .

 

[Hisalone]

Hisalone,

What was the first grievious sin committed in the Catholic Church? The answer is, the Betrayal of Jesus Christ, By Judas the betrayer.

Hisalone, Jesus Christ, knew that he was leaving his Church in the hands of men. And what do all men do? They sin! Every Catholic Priest is a sinner even the Pope. Jesus Christ knew this, yet he still left his Church in the hands of men but guided by the Holy Spirit in all truths.

If a priest has committed a Mortal Sin, such as molestation, that is is His doing not the Church’s doing, just as it was Judas doing, betraying Our Lord, and this was not the Catholic Church’s doing.

Regarding divided body, the Catholic church cannot be divided, if this were to happen that means the gates of hell has prevailed. Now any person who is not part of the Catholic Church, now that individual, he or she, is a devided body, by their own accord or by birth.

Ufam Tobie

You still dont understand the grevious sin of the Catholic Church. Corporately it has betrayed Christ.
The Catholic Church is divided and Satan has not prevailed against Christ Church.

 

[benedictus2]

Satan beleives that Jesus is the Christ, Satan does not **believe in **Jesus there is the difference. I am in Christ and therefore part of His body and a memeber of His Church. you can not seperate Him from me as muc as you would like to.

How do you know you are really in Christ? When Paul spoke of the Body of Christ He was talking about the Catholic Church. There was only one Church back then.

 

[benedictus2]

You still dont understand the grevious sin of the Catholic Church. Corporately it has betrayed Christ.
The Catholic Church is divided and Satan has not prevailed against Christ Church.

Nope the Catholic Church has not betrayed Christ. But the Protestant revolution has. That is why it is so easy for protestant denominations now to allow things that are contrary to Christ’s teaching.

The Church cannot betray Christ because it is His Body. The Body cannot betray the Head.

 

[benedictus2]

Hi there!

The early Church was indeed “catholic.” However, this should be differentiated from the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, and this is well-known, there are “Catholic” churches which are not Roman, such as the Eastern and Greek Orthodox. These churches are not under the pope for they have their own patriarchs. The problem arose when the Bishop of Rome declared himself pope and infallible to the exclusion of the other patriarchates, which were Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, etc. So it would indeed be arrogant to say that the Roman Catholic Church is the only One True Church which Christ founded to the exclusion of all the other Christian churches.

By the way, a lot of the Protestant reformers were Catholic priests, so it can also be argued, using your reasoning, that Protestantism also traces its lineage to Christ and the apostles.

Only in a very limtied sense. They started off being part of the tree but they broke away. Once they broke away they ceased to be part of the tree. Once it severed itself, it developed a life of its own. Which is why it rejected a lot of Christ’s own teachings.

Severed from Christ’s own Church, that is the only way for it to go.

And no the problem did not arise when the Bishop of Rose declared himself Pope. The Bishop of Rome has always been considered Prime Bishop even prior to the schism.

 

[benedictus2]

That’s it. His Church is not an organisation we are part of, but it is the body of all true believers.

Wrong. You cannot define Church as you please. Christ made that definition when He made the promise to build His Church upon Peter.

Acts 2:46-47
46 Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes. They ate their meals with exultation and sincerity of heart, 47 praising God and enjoying favor with all the people. And every day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.

“The Lord added to their number those who wer being saved” - now which number was that. That was the infant Catholic Church. And those who were being saved were being ADDED to that Church.

And the process of salvation is not a past even but an ongonig event. We are BEING saved, not “saved”

The failure to understand this is what brought about the erroneous conception among some protestants that they are “already saved”. The saving act (Life, Death and Ressurection) has already been accomplished, but salvation is an ongoing process.

 

[benedictus2]

God has given us the Bible and with it His Word. We do not have to rely on someone to misinterpret it.

That’s right, we do not have to rely on someone to MISINTERPRET IT. You are doing a good job by yourself.

But to correctly interpret it, we do have to rely on His Church from within whose bossom it was written.

We have the Spirit of God, the Comforter, to guide us in truth so that we can interpret Scripture rightly and so that our faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.

Rather presumptous to think that your interpreation is correct as against to the interpretation of all the Holy men and women, apostles and doctors of the Church.

Sounds to me the height of arrogance.
I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes.
If you are not ashamed of the Gospel then you be a member of the Body of Christ, the one He built upon Peter.

But if I am not mistaken, you would be very quick to quote Paul to the utter disregard of the Gospels.

 

[benedictus2]

If you were NOT ashamed of the Gospel you would adhere to it. You wouldn’t REJECT parts of it just because it was “hard” for you to accept.

He who hears you hears me…Jesus refereing to the Catholic Church

Well said.

 

[steve_b]

I agree! However, all the apostles are now long dead and gone!

Moses was long gone from THEIR sight (except at the transfiguration ) at the time Jesus said

2 "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, [Mt 23:2-3]

Can you find anywhere in the OT

• where Moses had a seat
• that the scribes and Pharisees sat on it when Moses died
• that everyone was to practice and do whatever they said because they sat on Moses chair

Did anyone object to what Jesus said, or ask Him where He got this notion because it was not written down in the sacred texts? Nope! Jesus was telling them what they already KNEW from oral Tradition. And He validates this oral Tradition as authoritative. And its authority, even though not written down, carried on long after Moses departed this life.

Therefore,

The authority for the Catholic Church, built on Peter, the pope and all the bishops united with him, in unbroken succession from the apostles, carries that same authority. Do what the Catholic Church tells you because Peter’s cathedra is here.

 

[erikd]

I agree! However, all the apostles are now long dead and gone!

“Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since the apostles, like a rich man [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth, so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life. . . . For how stands the case? Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient churches with which the apostles held constant conversation, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question?” (ibid., 3:4:1).
Irenaeus of Lyons [120-180 AD] Adversus Haereses (Book III, Chapter 4)

“The true knowledge is the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient organization of the Church throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the succession of bishops, by which succession the bishops have handed down the Church which is found everywhere” (ibid., 4:33:8).
Irenaeus of Lyons [120-180 AD] Adversus Haereses (Book IV, Chapter 33)

“Far be it from me to speak adversely of any of these clergy who, in succession from the apostles, confect by their sacred word the Body of Christ and through whose efforts also it is that we are Christians” (Letters 14:8 [A.D. 396]).
Jerome, St [347-420 AD] Against the Pelagians (Book I)

“[T]here are many other things which most properly can keep me in [the Catholic Church’s] bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15–17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house” (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [A.D. 397]).
Augustine of Hippo, St [354-430 AD] Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental