What is Christ's Church?

[kaycee]

But if they are letting a pre-Trib believer and a post-Trib believer receive Holy Communion together while considering each other to be in error, then what does that tell you about the importance they put on Holy Communion? I mean, shouldn’t they at least restrict it to people who believe the truth? (As they understand it.)

Because there are many non essentials. Salvation by Grace thru Faith in the substitutionary atonement is the ONLY REAL essential. Protestants dont need lockstep agreement for everything down to Peters hair color. The ECF’s differed on many things, including the meaning of Matt 16:18.

 

[Janet_S]

Because there are many non essentials. Salvation by Grace thru Faith in the substitutionary atonement is the ONLY REAL essential. Protestants dont need lockstep agreement for everything down to Peters hair color. The ECF’s differed on many things, including the meaning of Matt 16:18.

What are the essentials? What are the non-essentials? Are they subjective (everyone decides for themselves) or are they objective (clearly spelled out in the Bible)?

 

[Janet_S]

Another quote from the Biblicist: Romanism is not a Biblically based faith, but a traditionally based religion. And its leadership would be the first to admit it. The Scriptures take a subordinate role to their traditions, and the interpretation of the Scriptures (as well as their traditions) are subject to its “Magesterium,” its teaching authority, which they, traditionally, predicate infallible.

He should read the document Dei Verbum or some other CC document before he makes these erroneous comments.

ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V2REVEL.HTM

“9. Hence there exists a close connection and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence.(6)”

 

[Janet_S]

Quote from Biblicist: Man-made institutions are traced back to their founders, but “the faith” of a true believer, the faith of a true Biblicist, is not an institutional faith, but a living, abiding faith in the Word of God itself. A very ancient faith which existed long before that religious institution ever developed over in Rome during the Middle Ages.

The Anabaptists were a people who did not submit to the religious dictates of the Roman church but held to the “simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3-4).

The Biblicist is right about one thing. Man-made institutions are traced back to their founders. Anabaptists are a man-made institution traced back to the 16th century and their founder Zwingli.

 

[Janet_S]

Biblicist’s quote: Based on its works oriented salvation, Romanism cannot produce a saving faith amongst its devotees. It’s “faith” is focused on, and rests in, the church hierarchy itself (which Roman Catholics call their “mother”) and the authority it claims Christ gave to it to forgive sins and bestow (sacramentally) the so-called “graces” that will bring a “Catholic” to salvation and the hope of eternal life. No Roman Catholic believes, or is allowed to believe, he HAS eternal life now, contrary to Christ’s own words and the words of the Apostles. If any are saved within that institution they are saved not because of it, but in spite of it.

Someone already pointed this out. The CC doesn’t teach a works oriented salvation. We are saved by grace. This guy doesn’t know about the CC.

 

[Janet_S]

The ECF’s differed on many things, including the meaning of Matt 16:18.

Did any of the ECF’s have a “Protestant” understand of Matthew 16:18? I found these, and they all sound pretty Catholic to me:

Cyprian :“Our Lord, whose commands we ought to fear and observe, says in the Gospel, by way of assigning the episcopal dignity and settling the plan of his Church: ‘I say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever things you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth, they will be loosed also in heaven’” [Matt. 16:18-19]. From that time the ordination of bishops and the plan of the Church flows on through the changes of times and successions, for the Church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers. Since this has indeed been established by divine law, I marvel at the rash boldness of certain persons who have desired to write me as if they were writing letters in the name of the Church . . ." (Epistle to the Lapsed 3327):1 [A.D. 250]).

Cyprian: “On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition [A.D. 251]).

Ephraim:“Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the first-born in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [post A.D. 338]).

 

[ALLFORHIM]

But if they are letting a pre-Trib believer and a post-Trib believer receive Holy Communion together while considering each other to be in error, then what does that tell you about the importance they put on Holy Communion? I mean, shouldn’t they at least restrict it to people who believe the truth? (As they understand it.)

The only requirement for a person to take communion is that they are born-again. In other words they have to believe what Jesus did on the Cross. If they believe that then they are allowed. There are many people who take communion and the Eucharist who are not believers. Those are the people I would be concerned about.

 

[Blue_Serenity]

Access to the fullness of the faith, for one…

I ask the question, I get the answer.

 

[mrs_abbott]

There are many people who take communion and the Eucharist who are not believers. Those are the people I would be concerned about.

Right on!

 

[jmcrae]

The only requirement for a person to take communion is that they are born-again. In other words they have to believe what Jesus did on the Cross. If they believe that then they are allowed. There are many people who take communion and the Eucharist who are not believers. Those are the people I would be concerned about.

So, if I’m a born-again believer in Jesus the candy red Porsche 911, or in Jesus the space alien, I’m good to go, as far as your church is concerned? As long as I believe it died on the cross for my sins, of course!

 

[ALLFORHIM]

So, if I’m a born-again believer in Jesus the candy red Porsche 911, or in Jesus the space alien, I’m good to go, as far as your church is concerned? As long as I believe it died on the cross for my sins, of course!

HUH???

 

[MrS]

Okay… so Jesus shows up at your front door this coming Sunday morning… and says

"I would like to accompany you to My Church this morning… the one I founded and gave promises to… "

Knowing that you can no longer hedge the question, or beat around the bush, or say “I already told you” where would you take Him to fulfill HIS request ??

and do you think He would smile when you say

“well… we will have to agree to disagree…”

.

.

 

[jmcrae]

HUH???

Well, the doctrine that Jesus is God is a “man-made precept” of the Catholic Church that comes from the ECFs. There are quite a few Protestant religions that, while accepting that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, define who Jesus is quite differently than we do, based on their own understanding of the Scriptures.

According to what you said, all that people have to do in order to be “born again” is to believe that Jesus (how ever they define that name from a doctrinal standpoint) died for their sins on the Cross, and that doctrinal disagreements, because of the fact that doctrines are “man made,” aren’t important enough to worry about.

Or did I miss something?

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Well, the doctrine that Jesus is God is a “man-made precept” of the Catholic Church that comes from the ECFs. There are quite a few Protestant religions that, while accepting that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, define who Jesus is quite differently than we do, based on their own understanding of the Scriptures.

According to what you said, all that people have to do in order to be “born again” is to believe that Jesus (how ever they define that name from a doctrinal standpoint) died for their sins on the Cross, and that doctrinal disagreements, because of the fact that doctrines are “man made,” aren’t important enough to worry about.

Or did I miss something?

Hi,

I was under the impression that we both believed in the same doctrine of Jesus’s death and resurrection and that we are saved by Grace through faith and we are suppose to repent and accept that we need a Savior. Believing in that is what makes a person born again which enables them to partke of communion. If someone believes other then that then they are not a born again believer.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Okay… so Jesus shows up at your front door this coming Sunday morning… and says

"I would like to accompany you to My Church this morning… the one I founded and gave promises to… "

Knowing that you can no longer hedge the question, or beat around the bush, or say “I already told you” where would you take Him to fulfill HIS request ??

and do you think He would smile when you say

“well… we will have to agree to disagree…”

.

.

Hi,
Well since the body of believers are scattered all over the world I would take Him to my church since it is right down the road . But I think if Jesus came to me and said that I might drop dead first of pure awe.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Hi,
Well since the body of believers are scattered all over the world I would take Him to my church since it is right down the road . But I think if Jesus came to me and said that I might drop dead first of pure awe.

So your “denomination” is the One, True Church? (Because if it isn’t then which one is, because we are going to need assurance of right teaching.)

 

[jmcrae]

Hi,

I was under the impression that we both believed in the same doctrine of Jesus’s death and resurrection and that we are saved by Grace through faith and we are suppose to repent and accept that we need a Savior. Believing in that is what makes a person born again which enables them to partke of communion. If someone believes other then that then they are not a born again believer.

Yes, but my point is that this is a doctrine of the ECFs - we don’t find it explicitly in the Scriptures. I know why I believe it, but if you are going to reject the ECFs and their “man-made doctrines,” then you need to reject them totally.

Either that, or if you are going to believe them on this, then you should also believe the rest of their teachings, including that “confess your sins” means to go to a priest and actually reveal them, and that “accepting your Saviour” means physically accepting Him into your body at Mass, as well as spiritually into your soul.

 

[jmcrae]

Hi,
Well since the body of believers are scattered all over the world I would take Him to my church since it is right down the road . But I think if Jesus came to me and said that I might drop dead first of pure awe.

Here is an experiment for you to try, if you dare. When you pray, ask Jesus to show you His Church, and see what happens next. (Be prepared for your life to change completely.)

 

[ALLFORHIM]

So your “denomination” is the One, True Church? (Because if it isn’t then which one is, because we are going to need assurance of right teaching.)

Nope I never said my denom was the ONE TRUE CHURCH, just that it is close to my house. If Jesus wanted me to take Him to His church I would ask Him where do you want me to take you.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Here is an experiment for you to try, if you dare. When you pray, ask Jesus to show you His Church, and see what happens next. (Be prepared for your life to change completely.)

Hey,

You know what it is funny you say that because I have already done that many months ago when I first started chatting on the forum. When I did this He actually strengthened my faith and showed me over and over again that I am where I am suppose to be. When I come up aggainst something new I ask for help and clarity. So far so good:thumbsup: