Where were the Protestants before the 1500's?

[guanophore]

Ignatius but zero memory of content, but definitely a backslapper of heirarchy, some beautiful writing but almost to the point of puzzlement to motive.

Would you consider that Ignatius represents the Apostolic teaching in his support of bishops?

He was on his way to Rome to be fed to the lions for his faith, and wrote 7letters to churches along the way, exhorting them not to fall into heresy.

Reminds me of travelling pastors who really lift up with a flattering tongue the home pastors who invited them to speak, barely knowing them.

Oh dear, Ben. I will make it my prayer that you will come to be embarrassed by the words you have written here. I will also ask the intercession of Holy Ignatius, whose reputation and faith you have despoiled by such aspersions.

You seem to be lacking in knowledge of the history of Christianity; either that, or you choose to ignore it.

I think it might be a little of both.

 There is not a doubt in my mind that you would be one of the Jews that would persecute and ridicule Jesus, because he taught the way; just because you wouldn't test him first. Closed-mindedness is an ultimate act of too much self-pride.

Well, though I do agree with your point about closed mindedness, we must refrain from judging the faith and motives of others. If someone has to shut out history to preserve their faith, there is a good reason for that. It means a person is so fragile, or their faith so fragile, that the truth cannot be tolerated. Remember the prophesy about Christ “a bruised reed He shall not break”. Some people can only walk with a crutch. If that is the best they can do, it does not help to knock the crutch out from under them.

It all goes down to one question, really: Do you trust the opinions of the apostles, and the people who knew apostles, or ‘reformers’ who practiced faiths that were nonexistent before the 1500’s? It is always up to you.

Given his assessment of Ignatius above, I think this question has been answered.

 

[Jamma]

Let us stay focused on topic. Can any Lutheran, anglican, methodist, evangelical or pentecostal here prove that their doctrine was believed in, hy using the ecf or scripture as source?

 

[guanophore]

Angels are messengers but we are never to pray to an angel.

Perhaps you are having a semantics problem. There is nothing wrong with talking to angels.

Or do you think the Mother of God was doing wrong by having a conversation with an angel?

Do you think Jesus was in error for having a little chat with Moses and Elijah?

The New Age folks do that.

New Age people are not centered around Christ. I don’t know who they are talking to, and I am not sure they are either, but whatever they are doing has no bearing on how Christians interact in the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Jews always prayed to God only.

It is a good thing that this statement is not true. It does seem, however, to reveal a great deal of ignorance about Jewish faith and the Scriptures.

family and friends are Catholic, I was raised Catholic so I know about praying to saints.

Then what happened?

This is what the apostles taught in the bible. As guanophore said earlier, it was written by Catholics for Catholics.
Hebrews 4:16
Let us, therefore, come boldly unto the throne of his grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
Ephesians 3:12
In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence.

Yes, these things are taught. Other things are also taught, and they don’t cancel each other out. Why do you suppose that Jesus wanted Peter, James, and John to go up to the mountain with HIm, if He knew he would be seen by them talking to saints? If He was not trying to show them an important principle, why didn’t He leave them at the bottom of the hill?

 

[PRmerger]

Well actually it’s not in the bible.

Thank you for being honest.

So I will assume, then, that you are ok with believing and professing things about your religion that are not found in the Bible?

I’m going to get Catholic on you now. It’s Catholic tradition. It’s from a book called “Your Angels Guide My Steps.” A series of meditations from the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux who was a Catholic monk and Church reformer in the 13th century. Chapter 26 is from his knowledge of dominions, principalities and thrones. “We are not to focus our attention on the angels themselves. For the angels were created by God to show forth aspects of himself.”

This is very Catholic!

 

[guanophore]

Well actually it’s not in the bible. I’m going to get Catholic on you now. It’s Catholic tradition. It’s from a book called “Your Angels Guide My Steps.” A series of meditations from the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux who was a Catholic monk and Church reformer in the 13th century. Chapter 26 is from his knowledge of dominions, principalities and thrones. “We are not to focus our attention on the angels themselves. For the angels were created by God to show forth aspects of himself.”

Great reference Dalphon! Keep getting Catholic on me!

Exactly, the angels should not be our FOCUS. That does not mean they cannot help us or that we cannot ask them for help.

My brothers and sisters in Christ are not my “focus”, either, ,but they inspire me, and I readily ask for their prayers. Don’t you know anyone whose faith you admire, that you would ask for their prayers?

Do you think others who ask for your prayers are improperly “focused” on you?

Do you think that Mary was improperly “focused” on the angel Gabriel?

How did the Gospel writers find out that angels came to minister to Christ in the Garden?

 

[Jamma]

Let us stay focused on topic. Can any Lutheran, anglican, methodist, evangelical or pentecostal here prove that their doctrine was believed in, by using the ecf or scripture as source?

 

[guanophore]

No one in the Old Testament prayed to the dead except the heathens. It was called divination.

Those who die in the Lord are alive forevermore.

Do you think that God would participate in or allow divination among His saints?

I am going to guess you would answer “no”, so my next question is, why did God allow Samuel to appear to Saul? I Sam. 28:14

This conversation demonstrates that 1) the saints are alive and well 2) Those who die in the Lord know what is happening here on earth (to the extent that God desires them to know) 3) It is possible to have a conversation with a saint who has gone before us in faith 4) The saints can reveal things to us that we do not know.

He was talking about Elijah when Elijah was alive.

Your interpretation is not scripturally sound. 27 He is not God of the dead, but of the living; you are quite wrong.” (Matt. 12:27)

This errant view that you have adopted denies that those who die in the Lord are alive forevermore.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Acts 11:26 And they conversed there in the church a whole year; and they taught a great multitude, so that at Antioch the disciples were first named Christians.

Yes, the followers of Christ were called Christians. The Church was called “Catholic”.

So Christians today (and I include all Christians including myself) are not turning out the same product as the early Christians

Why not?

This applies to all denominations. The business of church, corruption, the love of money, absence of spirituality, incorrect teaching.

Dalphon, the sins of man cannot undo the Truth of God. No amount of people walking in the flesh or falling from grace can change what God has revealed about Himself. Departing from the Truth that was once for all deposited to the Saints will not cause a better “product” to be turned out.

 

[Cathoholic]

Benhur.

Earlier in post 146 I mentioned St. Irenaeus teaching:

ST. IRENAEUS But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. . . . .

You said in post 180:

“Irenaeus did not address our issue of scripture vs oral /tradition or even even council as we do today.”

That was not the point I was making.

The point was if he believed in sola Scriptura in a formal sufficiency sense, a statement like his wouldn’t make sense.

He should say:

Apostolic Tradition is preserved by the Scriptures and the Scriptures ONLY.

**But he didn’t say that. **

St. Irenaeus said Apostolic Tradition is preserved “by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches”.

ST. IRENAEUS But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. . . . .

This is NOT Protestant doctrine in any Protestant denomination that I am aware of.

(Am I incorrect on this? Do Protestants teach that Apostolic Tradition IS preserved by the succession of presbyters in the Churches?).

---

I also pointed out in post 146 that St. Paul said that faith comes by preaching which is a work of the preacher and that you can’t separate faith from works (and I quoted it) . . . .

ROMANS 10:15a, 17 15 And how can men preach unless they are sent? . . . 17 So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ.

Your response was:

Wow, so hearing is a work? Preaching may be, on the part of the evangelist, but the listening ? Well then I suppose there are a multitude of works necessary, try like breathing, eating, walking etc.

I didn’t say anything about “breathing”, “eating”, walking, etc. This is a straw man argument.

I think it was appropriate though, that you admitted “preaching” was a work. This makes my point: Saving faith and works are integrated at least in in some sense. You are going to have to deny that so you can hold to the tradition of sola fide.

Sola fide is a tradition of men that nullifies the Word of God.

I quoted what St. Paul said . . . and . . . . you took issue.

Concerning the inseparable aspect between faith and works, I think your real issue is with St. Paul (who I quoted), not me.

 

[guanophore]

Concerning the inseparable aspect between faith and works, I think your real issue is with St. Paul (who I quoted), not me.

 

[Dalphon]

Do you think that Mary was improperly “focused” on the angel Gabriel?

The angel appeared to Mary. She wasn’t praying to the angel.

 

[PRmerger]

The angel appeared to Mary. She wasn’t praying to the angel.

We Catholics define “praying to” differently than you do, it appears.

Mary was indeed “praying to” St. Gabriel as Catholics understand it. Prayer can be a discourse or dialogue with an angel or a saint.

It is not worship, necessarily.

That’s where your misunderstanding occurs. You seem to equate prayer with worship.

Yet there is no Bible verse which tells us that all prayer is worship.

That’s another man-made tradition you’ve been duped into believing, Dalphon. Already in your short stay here you’ve professed 2 man-made traditions you believe in.

 

[Dalphon]

Those who die in the Lord are alive forevermore.

Do you think that God would participate in or allow divination among His saints?

I am going to guess you would answer “no”, so my next question is, why did God allow Samuel to appear to Saul? I Sam. 28:14

This is an example of what NOT to do. Saul consulted a medium because God stopped talking to him.

8 Then Saul disguised himself by putting on other clothes, and went, he and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night; and he said, “Conjure up for me, please, and bring up for me whom I shall name to you.” 9 But the woman said to him, “Behold, you know what Saul has done, how he has cut off those who are mediums and spiritists from the land. Why are you then laying a snare for my life to bring about my death?” 10 Saul vowed to her by the LORD, saying, “As the LORD lives, no punishment shall come upon you for this thing.” 11 Then the woman said, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” And he said, “Bring up Samuel for me.” 12 When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice; and the woman spoke to Saul, saying, “Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul.” 13 The king said to her, “Do not be afraid; but what do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a divine being coming up out of the earth.” 14 He said to her, “What is his form?” And she said, “An old man is coming up, and he is wrapped with a robe.” And Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground and did homage.

  15 Then Samuel said to Saul, “Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” And Saul answered, “I am greatly distressed; for the Philistines are waging war against me, and God has departed from me and no longer answers me, either through prophets or by dreams; therefore I have called you, that you may make known to me what I should do.” 16 Samuel said, “Why then do you ask me, since the LORD has departed from you and has become your adversary? 17 “The LORD has done accordingly as He spoke through me; for the LORD has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, to David. 18 “As you did not obey the LORD and did not execute His fierce wrath on Amalek, so the LORD has done this thing to you this day.

This conversation demonstrates that 1) the saints are alive and well 2) Those who die in the Lord know what is happening here on earth (to the extent that God desires them to know) 3) It is possible to have a conversation with a saint who has gone before us in faith 4) The saints can reveal things to us that we do not know.

Yes and satan can disguise himself as an angel of light.

Your interpretation is not scripturally sound. 27 He is not God of the dead, but of the living; you are quite wrong.” (Matt. 12:27)

That’s because I was referring to James 5:17 in response to pablope in post 317.

This errant view that you have adopted denies that those who die in the Lord are alive forevermore.

They live forevermore but I don’t pray to them.

Yes, the followers of Christ were called Christians. The Church was called “Catholic”.

Yes but not in the new testament.

 

[PRmerger]

This is an example of what NOT to do. Saul consulted a medium because God stopped talking to him.

8 Then Saul disguised himself by putting on other clothes, and went, he and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night; and he said, “Conjure up for me, please, and bring up for me whom I shall name to you.” 9 But the woman said to him, “Behold, you know what Saul has done, how he has cut off those who are mediums and spiritists from the land. Why are you then laying a snare for my life to bring about my death?” 10 Saul vowed to her by the LORD, saying, “As the LORD lives, no punishment shall come upon you for this thing.” 11 Then the woman said, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” And he said, “Bring up Samuel for me.” 12 When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice; and the woman spoke to Saul, saying, “Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul.” 13 The king said to her, “Do not be afraid; but what do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a divine being coming up out of the earth.” 14 He said to her, “What is his form?” And she said, “An old man is coming up, and he is wrapped with a robe.” And Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground and did homage.

  15 Then Samuel said to Saul, “Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” And Saul answered, “I am greatly distressed; for the Philistines are waging war against me, and God has departed from me and no longer answers me, either through prophets or by dreams; therefore I have called you, that you may make known to me what I should do.” 16 Samuel said, “Why then do you ask me, since the LORD has departed from you and has become your adversary? 17 “The LORD has done accordingly as He spoke through me; for the LORD has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, to David. 18 “As you did not obey the LORD and did not execute His fierce wrath on Amalek, so the LORD has done this thing to you this day.

Amen!

Catholicism forbids consultation with a medium.

All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to “unveil” the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone.–CCC 2116
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c1a1.htm#2116

 

[Dalphon]

Perhaps you are having a semantics problem. There is nothing wrong with talking to angels.

There’s nothing wrong with talking to the mailman either but he only delivers the message. If you just put it in the mailbox and don’t ever see him, he will take it and deliver the message because that’s his job.

 

[PRmerger]

There’s nothing wrong with talking to the mailman either but he only delivers the message. If you just put it in the mailbox and don’t ever see him, he will take it and deliver the message because that’s his job.

Right.

Prayer to the angels and saints is not worshipping them.

It is simply like talking to the mailman. They pray before the Eternal Throne of heaven, offering petitions to God, because they are part of the Body of Christ.

 

[Dalphon]

We Catholics define “praying to” differently than you do, it appears.

Mary was indeed “praying to” St. Gabriel as Catholics understand it. Prayer can be a discourse or dialogue with an angel or a saint.

It is not worship, necessarily.

That’s where your misunderstanding occurs. You seem to equate prayer with worship.

Yet there is no Bible verse which tells us that all prayer is worship.

That’s another man-made tradition you’ve been duped into believing, Dalphon. Already in your short stay here you’ve professed 2 man-made traditions you believe in.

You are taking arguments from other people and applying them to me. I don’t believe praying to a saint is an act of worship. I don’t think it’s wrong for Catholics to pray to saints. It’s just not something I do because for me it’s not necessary. I believe I can pray to God.

 

[Stephen_C]

You are taking arguments from other people and applying them to me. I don’t believe praying to a saint is an act of worship. I don’t think it’s wrong for Catholics to pray to saints. It’s just not something I do because for me it’s not necessary. I believe I can pray to God.

This is what get’s my goat…that some how we as Catholic do not pray directly to God. Yes we do! But I also ask my brother and sister’s here with me, and those who have gone before me. To pray with me…

 

[benhur]

Yet he rather explicitly wrote ‘Catholic Church’, and rather explicitly stated he was in communion with it. Did you try reading the letter?

Actually he wrote something like this , " I AM IN COMMUNION WITH THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF WHICH" of course in Greek I believe which are all capitals . I am just saying i believe proper english translation would not have a capital c as you have placed it. it could easily read, “I am in communion with the catholic church of which……” Yes I read it. yes he espoused a universal church , one that he saw in many different cities as he traveled to Rome supposedly. Different cities, different countries, different cultures, yet believers united in similar faith, hence universal. Here is preferred translation by Lightfoot , " 8:2 Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be; even as where Jesus may be, there is the** universal Church.**" earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-lightfoot.html

 

[Jamma]

I am going to unsubscribe as I see little good coming from this thread.

 

[Nanotwerp]

Actually he wrote something like this , " I AM IN COMMUNION WITH THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF WHICH" of course in Greek I believe which are all capitals . I am just saying i believe proper english translation would not have a capital c as you have placed it. it could easily read, “I am in communion with the catholic church of which……” Yes I read it. yes he espoused a universal church , one that he saw in many different cities as he traveled to Rome supposedly. Different cities, different countries, different cultures, yet believers united in similar faith, hence universal. Here is preferred translation by Lightfoot , " 8:2 Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be; even as where Jesus may be, there is the** universal Church.**" earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-lightfoot.html

What gives you the presumption that the letter was in upper-case, as you seem to describe it?

And what makes you think the Catholic Church isn’t universal?