The Church Body

[SteveGC]

Jesus did establish His Church; but never once called it Catholic. He didn’t even hint at a denomination!

Sure He did. He named it several times. He called it ONE. The problem is, you think He was referring to the fact that everybody just has a simple unified belief in Him, and does their best to try to follow Him, using the Bible…even if they don’t all agree with, nor practice, the salvific plan God laid out for the faithful. So some will be baptized, others won’t…but this is OK, even though the issue has critical salvific consequences, even though you’re not REALLY “ONE” in what is believed…that’s OK…just believe in who I am and do your best. What? Some say abortion is OK? Others say no? Oh, that’s ok…so you’re not ONE in that regard either…no biggie. Just do your best. Once saved, always saved? Yes? No? Ah, who cares? Just believe…

Give us a break. ONE is ONE is ONE. You’re either unified in everything regarding faith and morals…or YOU’RE NOT ONE. So get unified, and until then…quit docking Catholics for being…ONE. No one is forcing you to become Catholic. But atleast take a lesson from us and get your body of believers together on what they believe…because “unity in diversity” isn’t working out too well for you.

 

[cuzzyn17]

The Catholic Church alone has been given the keys of heaven and earth, no other. You want everyone to be together but as above you want to be different. So is it that you want everyone to think the way YOU do? What makes your beliefs correct? Did Christ entrust the keys of the kingdom to you? So you reject the teachings of the Catholic Church and proclaim that you are doing what the bible says. Guess what, that’s the claim that thousands and millions make also, they claim they are going by what the bible teaches and the Holy Spirit is guiding THEM but they don’t believe the same things you believe and from the same bible! See the problem?

I see now submit to the church not Christ. Thanks:thumbsup:

 

[SteveGC]

I see now submit to the church not Christ. Thanks:thumbsup:

Incorrect. You do not see. Submit to Christ, who asks you, in your submission, to trust and follow His Church, His earthly shepherd of the faithful.

 

[cuzzyn17]

Incorrect. You do not see. Submit to Christ, who asks you, in your submission, to trust and follow His Church, His earthly shepherd of the faithful.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[red_eye_chimera]

First off, you identify yourself as a “Catholic Christian”. Anyone who knows and understands the teachings of the Church would not call himself a “Catholic Christian” as Catholics are the original Christians. You can’t be a Catholic and not be a Christian, so it’s like saying you’re a “Christian Christian”. Second, a Catholic would never say that it’s ok not to follow the Catholic laws as you stated. As all Catholics know that the Church is Jesus on earth and not following the teachings of the Church is not following the teachings of Christ since the Church and Christ are one and the same. Third, you are correct that Jesus will judge us but how will he judge us? He established one Church for all men and for 1500 years there was only one Church. Now there are thousands of them teaching different teachings. Which are correct? Everyone says they are following Christ, if so, then there would be only one church not thousands. Are they following the teachings of Christ or their own personal beliefs? “Not everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved but he who does the will of the Father.” If these churches teach different things then how can they know what the will of the Father is? That’s why Jesus established his Church, which came to be called “Catholic” about 100Ad.

HMM I forgot about all of that. Catholics are Christians and the Catholics were the first Christians deriving off of Jesus’ teachings. The reason I said I was a “Catholic Christian”
which of course sounds dumb, because not many people in my school acknoledges that Catholics are Christians. I’m sorry if I sounded ignorant.:banghead:

 

[SteveGC]

I was being sarcastic.

Well, I didn’t quite think you were serious about DOING that, but it sounded like you BELIEVED that was the message being presented. Sorry, I guess I didn’t read into what you meant.

 

[Protestant101]

Secondly, I assume by saying “Catholics have been telling people not to become protestant” in this context, you are referring to “heresies”? So…your contention is that being separated from The Catholic Church today is justified, because since the beginning, the Catholic Church has fought off and condemned heretical belief? Just so I’m clear…because it’s a unique position, one I’ve never heard before. You would then say, therefore, that the many heresies that have historically taken place in Christianity, were, in fact, authentic Christian practices? They weren’t heresies at all? And The Church was itself the heresy, hypocritcally condemning other sects that weren’t inline with Her? Hmm. Well, there were dozens of them…which ones were actual heresy, and which ones weren’t? Were they all falsely condemned? Can you name them all? I can’t.

So, if the Catholic Church is incorrect, and you can’t p(name removed by moderator)oint the “heresies” that were falsely accused, and were in fact correct…what, or who do you follow? I mean, besides Jesus of course, whom we ALL follow. What teaching source? Just your Bible? What group of peope put that book together for you? Did they have a name, this group? I mean, if you hold the Bible as your sole authority, I would rationally expect that you, and all the other Bible-only’s, to be the “go-to” experts regarding the origin of the Bible. Could you give us a summary of that origin, so we can learn why our account of it is in error?

Along those lines…who taught you what you now hold to be true about Christianity? I know it wasn’t just you, the Spirit, and your Bible. No one can claim that. So, who’d you learn Christianity from? I assume it’s a long list of people and groups in your life. Why do you trust them, and not someone else that taught other Bible-only people something different from the Bible? I mean, how can you really trust what you’re being taught? Do you base your trust on the fact that you’ve “validated” from reading the Bible what these people have taught you? Do you then, discredit other Bible-only’s out there who claim the same “validation” technique, yet hold to a vastly different understanding of the Bible than you?

Sorry for the barrage of questions…but I’d really like to see a convincing argument as to how you authenticate your Christianity.

God Bless

It doesn’t matter if a person has a different take on something in the Bible than what I do; they can still be guided by God, and can still be counted as “Christian.” There’s absolutely nothing the Catholic Church can do to change that inspite of all her doctrine to the contrary.

 

[Deconi]

It doesn’t matter if a person has a different take on something in the Bible than what I do; they can still be guided by God, and can still be counted as “Christian.” There’s absolutely nothing the Catholic Church can do to change that inspite of all her doctrine to the contrary.

Sooo…what you’re saying is, ALL those who have the same take on anything in the Bible (Catholics / Orthodox ) are being guided by God, AS WELL as the multiversions of Protestants who have some differences in takes on Scriptures as you?

So there is a time God MISLEADS people??!?!?!!!

The Catholic Church cannot teach, guide or correct on ANY matters Biblical, Her Book for followers of Her Maker, but YOU and ANYONE can??!!

 

[cuzzyn17]

Sooo…what you’re saying is, ALL those who have the same take on anything in the Bible (Catholics / Orthodox ) are being guided by God, AS WELL as the multiversions of Protestants who have some differences in takes on Scriptures as you?

So there is a time God MISLEADS people??!?!?!!!

The Catholic Church cannot teach, guide or correct on ANY matters Biblical, Her Book for followers of Her Maker, but YOU and ANYONE can??!!

If God gives me a rahma word that is specificly for a situation I am dealing with in my life may not mean the same thing for a situation in your life. Not taking away from the word but giving healing to different situations with the same word.Not misleading but helping people in different situations. So if by me being transformed by the word and not continuing my sinful life because it is not the way the Catholic Church says it should be ,then I am automatically wrong and still living my life in vain.So I might as well go back to being a drug taking, drunk driving ,wife abusing, child neglecting , adulterous, theiving member of society.

 

[ricko]

It doesn’t matter if a person has a different take on something in the Bible than what I do; they can still be guided by God, and can still be counted as “Christian.” There’s absolutely nothing the Catholic Church can do to change that inspite of all her doctrine to the contrary.

So, to put it in plain words, God has different laws for different people. “They can have a different take (belief) and still be guided by God” So that means everyone can have a different belief on baptism, abortion, polygamy, incest, homosexuality, lying, cheating, divorce, marriage and many more. That would also mean that God teaches different truths, that the laws he spelled out in the bible are flexible and not really binding on anyone as long as the person says that he is guided by God. That’s not the God I know from the bible. God does not play favorites, His laws apply equally to all. He is THE truth (not many different truths) and never changing.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Hmmm…things to think about there, for sure. For me, I must wonder: When did being explicitly, unashamedly, unreservedly RELIGIOUS start being seen as a bad thing, or something to de-emphasize? I love my religion. I am proud of it. I believe in it and would never take another, and I would die for it if that were to be in my future at any point. It sustains me and binds me in communion with believers who I don’t share any other characteristics (language, age, politics, etc). It is certainly the galvanizing force that provides me my personal integrity, and it is only a tragedy for me that it is not also so deeply woven into the society in which I live now as I have seen it in other places (and I am not talking about theocracies, I am talking about individual communities of believers in Mexico and the United States).

Being religious is a great thing if you are blessed with the spirit to do great things with it. If not, maybe you will see it as bad or a waste of time, but I sure don’t. Specifically avoiding religion to follow God is like specifically avoiding your refrigerator to look for food in your bathtub instead. Are you going to follow Christ to everywhere BUT the Church? The place where He is really present in the Eucharist? That makes no sense to me, I’m sorry.

I don’t think the OP meant that religions were unnecessary or bad. Perhaps I am wrong in that. I would argue that religions serve very important needs in society. God, we believe, envisions us as “community” and in some sense perhaps the trinity is indicative of that. We pray in community, we worship in it. We also by community serve our communities much better, collecting various resources of time, money and talent and dispersing it as needed. We offer teaching in community.

That does not mean that religion is not without it’s error. Religious differences have caused death on massive scales over history, and God surely intends no such thing. Worse, we see it here in utter divisiveness, and the trumpeting of one or another religion as best, first, etc. Such behavior is more akin to worship of a particular institution than it is of Christ.

I think the OP was suggesting just that, not that one should be dropped for the other. We just need to keep the institution into prospective. It is not what we worship, but what fascilitates our worship and service. I think that is sometimes forgotten in our desperation to prove that “ours” is better than “theirs”. Apologetics has turned a corner from explaining to proving something, and that is not a good thing.

 

[Protestant101]

I don’t think the OP meant that religions were unnecessary or bad. Perhaps I am wrong in that. I would argue that religions serve very important needs in society. God, we believe, envisions us as “community” and in some sense perhaps the trinity is indicative of that. We pray in community, we worship in it. We also by community serve our communities much better, collecting various resources of time, money and talent and dispersing it as needed. We offer teaching in community.

That does not mean that religion is not without it’s error. Religious differences have caused death on massive scales over history, and God surely intends no such thing. Worse, we see it here in utter divisiveness, and the trumpeting of one or another religion as best, first, etc. Such behavior is more akin to worship of a particular institution than it is of Christ.

I think the OP was suggesting just that, not that one should be dropped for the other. We just need to keep the institution into prospective. It is not what we worship, but what fascilitates our worship and service. I think that is sometimes forgotten in our desperation to prove that “ours” is better than “theirs”. Apologetics has turned a corner from explaining to proving something, and that is not a good thing.

You are very close to what I am trying to express. God has the same rules for everyone; that is obvious, but He also meets us where we are at, and we don’t have to be Catholic for Him to meet us - nor does one have to be Adventist for that to happen.

And I woud agree, certain “apologetics” so called, has turned a corner from explaining to attacking in a very antisocial and heretical manner.

 

[ricko]

The Bible is sufficient; for it is GOD’S WORD.

As long as it is interpreted His way and not yours.

 

[Protestant101]

As long as it is interpreted His way and not yours.

Interesting how you left out the first part of my signature…That is God’s way.

 

[SteveGC]

Interesting how you left out the first part of my signature…That is God’s way.

Well, then let’s review that first part…

“The Bible is it’s own, best Expositor”

Really? For whom?

Everyone? Equally? Or just you? “The Bible is it’s own, best Expositor for me”. Would that be how you’d title that for clarity? Or this…“The bible is it’s own, best Expositor for all the world who reads it”.

The former reveals that you set yourself apart from the body of believers, the same that you would proclaim is the real “church”. It shows that you believe you alone hold the truth, based on your interpretations.

The latter is quickly defeated in substance, as soon as one realizes (rather quickly) that the “exposition” the Bible provides to the world, is an exposition in chaos, disunity, and confusion. I wouldn’t classify that as “the best Expositor”.

So…which is it then?

 

[Peter_J]

I am not saying it is bad, but when we are so caught up in our “religion” that we are so closed minded into believing “we” are the only religion that is right . Is it a tragedy because not all believe in your religion or that so few believe in salvation through christ?

So if I know that I am anointed through the spirit , but because I am not this religion or that religion some people in that belief system would say that I am wrong or it is a false spirit because of their religion. I wholeheartedly think we need to seek out a church to feed our spirit ,we definitely need to be part of a body of believers . As individuals are part of a church each church is part of the body of Christ .I guess my concern is more about unity in the community of believers in Christ than having these walls up against other “religions”. Not saying anything wrong with religion but getting caght up in it rather than the Word.

Hi cuzzyn17,

I don’t want to get into a big thing here, but I would like to point out that the way you’re using the term “religion” is slightly different from the way Catholics use the term.

From the Catholic p.o.v., Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox alike all adhere to the same religion: Christianity.

I realize that this is a marked difference from the way some Protestants use the term – some Evangelical Protestants, in particular, consider Catholicism to be “a different religion”. (This explains why a lot of Catholic-Protestant discussion takes place in the “Non-Catholic Religions Forum”.)

 

[red_eye_chimera]

You are definitely off the mark in this post. Why the Catholic Church, through this forum and website even has a little booklet advertised supposedly about God’s Love; but really with the major focus of telling people why they should become Catholics instead of Protestants. For 2000 years Catholics have been trying to do this, tell people not to become Protestants, proving that Protestants have always existed, for as long as the Catholic Church has. It wasn’t called “Catholic” back then; neither was it called “Protestant” and yet we all know that they were there, in the Bible, and in other historical accounts. Jesus Himself was a Protestant, and I take great comfort in following our Lord down the same path.

You’re right about a couple things. There was no seperation between Catholic and Protestant from the time of the apostles durring the birth of Christianity 'till Luther in the Reformation. And the Catholic Church is supposed to spread God’s love. However Jesus wasn’t Protestant. He wasn’t Catholic either.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

You are definitely off the mark in this post. Why the Catholic Church, through this forum and website even has a little booklet advertised supposedly about God’s Love; but really with the major focus of telling people why they should become Catholics instead of Protestants. For 2000 years Catholics have been trying to do this, tell people not to become Protestants, proving that Protestants have always existed, for as long as the Catholic Church has. It wasn’t called “Catholic” back then; neither was it called “Protestant” and yet we all know that they were there, in the Bible, and in other historical accounts. Jesus Himself was a Protestant, and I take great comfort in following our Lord down the same path.

Gabriel of 12:
I dont think I am off the mark of his post, reread the OP? The Catholic church does not entertain the idea that one should become Catholic and not Protestant; That comes from those who oppose the “Truth” the Catholic church teaches from Jesus and the apostles, who also has been commissioned by Jesus Christ to go out into all the world and make disciples. Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary who was a first century Jew. Jesus himself was God incarnate not a protestant. Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, not Protest this truth of God.

You know very well your faith only has roots to the 18th century and that is debatable because your denomination has changed in its doctrine since your founders.

Yes the Catholic church can trace her roots all the way back to the first century, including belief’s and living Saints.

I think your protest to my post is off the mark of the OP. I was introducing the scriptural theology body of Jesus Christ in the Catholic church, not advertising for one to become Catholic instead of Protestant.

P.S there were no Christian Protestant church’s for the first 1100 years of Catholic Christianity since the resurrection of Jesus, only heretics, excommunicated persons, and apostates. No protestants existed only the Catholic church.

Nice to speak with you protestant101

 

[SteveGC]

You are very close to what I am trying to express. God has the same rules for everyone; that is obvious, but He also meets us where we are at, and we don’t have to be Catholic for Him to meet us - nor does one have to be Adventist for that to happen.

And I woud agree, certain “apologetics” so called, has turned a corner from explaining to attacking in a very antisocial and heretical manner.

There’s a big difference between God “meeting someone where they’re at”…and “guiding them into all Truth”.

Catholics don’t suggest that one must be Catholic to have a personal relationship with Christ. Christ knows no bounds, and the Holy Spirit is at work in the lives of all non-Catholics. But, we will also tell you that Christ doesn’t want you to separate yourselves from the ONE Body that He instituted on earth, of which He is the Head, and through which that same Holy Spirit comes to all the world. He doesn’t want you to hold His written word as your sole authority, for it was never intended to be so. He doesn’t want you to interpret Scripture outside of the deposit of faith He imparted onto the Church, so that there would always be one single source of truth regarding faith and morals, and hence, all teaching would have solidarity. Does He “meet you where you’re at”? Sure. Absolutely. And perhaps if you listen to Him more closely, and let Him drown out the protestant, separatist theologies you are exposed to, you will more clearly hear these messages of His.

It’s not an “ours is better than theirs” proclamation. It’s a testament to Truth. Furthermore, apologetics is not just “explaining”, it is also defending. If SpiritMeadow thinks that defending means proving, so be it. If you think it means “attacking”, then either you’re experiencing apologetics from an uncharitable Catholic, or you’re overly sensitive to anyone who challenges the fact that you are following a partial truth, and like all the rest of our separated brethren, are called to come back home. Probably both cases are true. In any event, we wouldn’t need apologetics (nor this thread) if everyone stayed unified in the place where Christ intended us to be unified.

You say it’s “obvious God has the same rules for everyone”…I believe that too…I’m just surprised YOU do, given the fact that the protestant world is a living example of disunity in rules, confusion over faith and morals, confusion over salvific essentials.

To the OP: “Religion” is not blocking our capacity to unify and spread the Word. “Religion(S) are”. There’s only supposed to be one authentic religion on earth. The Catholic Church cannot just stop it’s Christ-instituted mission of shepherding the world unto Truth, nor compromise on its deposit of faith, just for the sake of “unity” with all Her separated faithful. If you feel “religion” is the problem, and that we need to be all one body, then come home. There’s only ONE authentic Body out there. You would propose that the Catholic Church is part of the problem of “religion”…and we say, No. The problem lies in the separation of the Body from your Christian predecessors, who abandoned that ONE Body to create their own multitude of “bodies”. The solution, therefore, is to re-unite back into the ONE true Body of Christ.

 

[Peter_J]

If you feel “religion” is the problem, and that we need to be all one body, then come home.

Indeed, when you come right come down to it, that’s the only logical attitude for anyone to take.