Where were the Protestants before the 1500's?

[FathersKnowBest]

My pastor quotes that scripture also as pertaining to his church. 7th Day Adventists also quote that for themselves. I would think hundreds or maybe thousands of churches who study the bible apply that to their own church.

Except for the inconvenient facts of history.

Look, I could claim that I actually own your house. That doesn’t mean that I could get a court to side with me.

 

[Dalphon]

What is “Protestant tradition”?
Jon

Worship, teaching of the word and communion.
Is this going to get into transubstantiation? If it does count me out. I need a break.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

I’ve been over that many times on this thread. I’m not going to do it again.

Yes, but have you ever answered the question?

Why then did you ask:

They teach the bible. Is that everything?

 

[JonNC]

Worship, teaching of the word and communion.
Is this going to get into transubstantiation? If it does count me out. I need a break.

No, not transubstantiation. I’m Lutheran. But Lutherans are often reminded here that we were the first protestants - and believe in infant baptism, baptismal regeneration, the real presence, and confession/ Holy Absolution. Liturgical worship. IOW, word and sacrament.

My point is one is hard-pressed to find any such thing as “protestant tradition”. Lutheranism is a tradition. Anabaptist is a tradition. Calvinism is a tradition. Etc.
It is therefore helpful for all involved that we be specific, in my view.

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

It must be understood that very few Catholics will be free from error. The catechism is about 500 pages long. You would first have to be fairly educated and then try to understand it all when you’ve finished reading it.
What good is having all the correct teachings if you can’t convey them in an understandable way to the whole church?

I’m with you on that. I’ve seen many man-made traditions and errors among Protestants.

Look, Dalphon: we are agreed that the men (or women?) who are preaching at your church are fallible. And that their interpretations of Scripture are fallible.

Fallible means…they are going to be erroneous at some point. What they teach is going to be wrong.

My Church has an infallible authority by which we can measure what our priests are professing. So even if our priests are fallible, my Church is infallible.

Which is better? Your way–in which you have to be certain (certain!) that your pastor is going to be wrong at some point?

Or the Catholic way–in which we have the assurance that the gates of hell will not prevail and the kerygma will not be vitiated or corrupted.

 

[pablope]

Originally Posted by pablope View Post
Yes, we do because of the promise of Christ to build His church upon the rock of Peter and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Not for us Catholics, we have the magisterium to sort it out, and we pray and study for acceptance of the teaching of the magisterium.

So after studying and praying and living…how have you sorted out what is opinion from the truth?

Quote:
As the Bible says, the angel can mask as an angel of light, and plant 99 truths to one falsehood.
The Catholic church is not immune to that either.

But the Catholic Church is immune from teaching falsehood on faith and morals through the infallibility of the Magisterium, through the pope, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Quote:
So again, how can you tell you are being led the real Holy Spirit? The Bible tells you to test the spirits…so how have you tested the spirits?
I John 4:1
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;…
2 John 1:7
I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.
3 John 1:11
Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God.

But then satan can do all what you posted in 2John and 3John…it does acknowledge Jesus Christ, and imitate good to deceive…so you are back to square one…how do you test the true spirit from the spirit of falsehood?

Perhaps you missed it…1John 4… Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world……………6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

Quote:
More evasion from you. This has been answered previously…by the common teaching, common life, common worship and liturgies of the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

So I will shoot back the question you have evaded: How do you know what is being taught to you is actually from the Apostles and not mere opinion?
I’ve already gone over this many times. I’m being taught the teachings of the apostles from the new testament only.

Wait a minute, in a prior post, you said not everything from the Apostles in being taught in your church…so now you are contradicting yourself.

Quote:
So back to you…has your church tested the spirits? How?
Yes they have.

How? How have you applied 1john4:6?

1John 4… Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world……………6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

[/QUOTE]

 

[PRmerger]

My apologies, I didn’t realize that you were only interested knowing what a person needed to know in the thirty seconds before he or she died. I guess I missed that post.

Yes. It’s a very peculiar point Dalphon seems to want to be making.

It’s like a boyfriend asking a girlfriend not, “Will you marry me?” but rather, “What’s the minimum amount of contact I need to have with you in order to be considered your boyfriend?”

 

[PRmerger]

They used to say people who commit suicide go straight to hell.

Source for this, please.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes I know.

I’m saying the original 12 did not have today’s catechism

Absolutely they did. They professed it. They claimed it. They taught it.

The Catholic Faith was given ONCE FOR ALL to the saints. The Catholic Faith was whole and entire before a single word of the NT was ever put to writ.

Thus, the CCC was professed on day 1, as it today.

 

[PRmerger]

So long as the petition is to the Godhead and not the saint,that God makes it happen and not the saint. God heals you, protects you on your journey, helps you remember things,helps with vocations etc…

Then make sure you never** petition** your fellow church members to pray for you, okay?

 

[PRmerger]

They teach bible only and Jesus only…

Dalphon, is Sunday your day of worship?

Yes

Can you please give the Bible verse where your pastor gets the idea that Sunday is the day of worship?

 

[Dalphon]

Look, Dalphon: we are agreed that the men (or women?) who are preaching at your church are fallible. And that their interpretations of Scripture are fallible.

Fallible means…they are going to be erroneous at some point. What they teach is going to be wrong.

My Church has an infallible authority by which we can measure what our priests are professing. So even if our priests are fallible, my Church is infallible.

Teachings that have changed over time
Only Catholics will go to heaven
Suicide is unforgivable
Eating meat on Friday is a mortal sin
Unbaptized children cannot see God

Apostolic teaching that is never mentioned
Mark 16:17-18
“These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

1 Corinthians 12:7-11
“But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.”

Which is better? Your way–in which you have to be certain (certain!) that your pastor is going to be wrong at some point?

When my pastor is wrong he admits it. I can trust a man like that.

Or the Catholic way–in which we have the assurance that the gates of hell will not prevail and the kerygma will not be vitiated or corrupted.

I’m not out of the Church because of what they teach but because of what they do.

 

[Dalphon]

Can you please give the Bible verse where your pastor gets the idea that Sunday is the day of worship?

It’s not in the bible. It comes from Catholicism which contains only 9 commandments given to Moses. The Sabbath was changed to Sunday by someone who thought he had the authority to change that which was written by God Himself. I hope we’re not going down that road now. You know, only a shadow of things to come, old testament law, Lord’s day. I already know the routine.

 

[Dalphon]

Absolutely they did. They professed it. They claimed it. They taught it.

The Catholic Faith was given ONCE FOR ALL to the saints. The Catholic Faith was whole and entire before a single word of the NT was ever put to writ.

Thus, the CCC was professed on day 1, as it today.

You mean they knew the Muslims were in God’s plan of salvation? They didn’t have Muslims.

 

[Dalphon]

Source for this, please.

baltimore-catechism.com/lesson33.htm

Q. 1274. What sin is it to destroy one’s own life, or commit suicide, as this act is called?

A. It is a mortal sin to destroy one’s own life or commit suicide, as this act is called, and persons who willfully and knowingly commit such an act die in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of Christian burial. It is also wrong to expose one’s self unnecessarily to the danger of death by rash or foolhardy feats of daring.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Apostolic teaching that is never mentioned

Mark 16:17-18
“These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

Where on earth do you come up with this stuff?

I was a member of a large (1,000+ member) Catholic Charismatic Community in Maryland for 15 years.

I can assure you that we Charismatic Catholics talked about those things all the time. So did the seven priests and four Franciscan nuns who were members as well as the many priests, nuns and occasional bishop who visited us.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’m not out of the Church because of what they teach but because of what they do.

Wow. This is the the fatal flaw, the Achilles’ Heel in your reasoning for leaving the Catholic Church.

Everything you’ve said in this thread to this point pales in comparison to this because you have just admitted that you are not following the teaching of Jesus.

Here’s why:

THE IMPACT OF SIN ON CHURCH AUTHORITY

If a Church leader is guilty of gross immorality, does his sin invalidate his position or authority?

Many, if not most, Protestants would say that it does, and they often use this line of reasoning to justify their denial of the authority of the Catholic Church. They cite historical events such as the Crusades, the Inquisition or reign of the Borgia Popes as evidence that the Church has lost its claim to moral and spiritual authority.

Such a response, however, is unbiblical. For example, Scripture states that Jesus knew “from the beginning” who would betray him – namely Judas, whom Jesus calls a “devil” (cf. John 6:64–71). This fact is significant, since Judas was selected as an apostle even though Jesus knew that he was corrupt.

Another example would be found in Jesus’ teaching on “Moses’ seat” found in the opening verses of Matthew 23: “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: ‘The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.’” (Matthew 23:1-3)

“Moses’ seat” is a phrase that referred to a position of legitimate teaching authority held by the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. Later, Jesus condemned these men as “hypocrites,” “blind guides,” “blind fools,” “serpents,” and a “brood of vipers.” But in the passage above, Jesus specifically instructed the crowds and his disciples to obey these leaders – despite their corruption – because of the authority of their position. That is sobering stuff.

If it were true that immorality invalidated a religious leader’s authority, then why did Jesus command his followers to “obey and do everything” the scribes and Pharisees tell them? Jesus merely admonished his followers not to follow their hypocritical example. There is not even the slightest hint that their positions had been forfeited or abrogated because of their hypocrisy or immorality. If anything, the reverse is true because Jesus validated these leaders’ office by telling people to obey them. From this, we see that sin and corruption found in the individual office holders has no impact whatsoever on the authority of the office itself.

I encourage you to pray about this, Dalphon. Seriously. :sad_yes:

 

[Dalphon]

Where on earth do you come up with this stuff?

I was a member of a large (1,000+ member) Catholic Charismatic Community in Maryland for 15 years.

I can assure you that we Charismatic Catholics talked about those things all the time. So did the seven priests and four Franciscan nuns who were members as well as the many priests, nuns and occasional bishop who visited us.

That’s a very tiny fraction of the overall church if you want to account for how many Catholics have existed from day 1 until now. Most of them know nothing about it. Many Catholics who were around in the time period you’re talking about condemn it.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Apostolic teaching that is never mentioned

Mark 16:17-18
“These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

1 Corinthians 12:7-11
“But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.”

1 Corinthians 12:29-31
29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[d]? Do all interpret? 31 Now eagerly desire the greater gifts. And yet I will show you the most excellent way.

 

[Dalphon]

Wow. This is the the fatal flaw, the Achilles’ Heel in your reasoning for leaving the Catholic Church.

THE IMPACT OF SIN ON CHURCH AUTHORITY

If a Church leader is guilty of gross immorality, does his sin invalidate his position or authority?

Many, if not most, Protestants would say that it does, and they often use this line of reasoning to justify their denial of the authority of the Catholic Church. They cite historical events such as the Crusades, the Inquisition or reign of the Borgia Popes as evidence that the Church has lost its claim to moral and spiritual authority.

Such a response, however, is unbiblical. For example, Scripture states that Jesus knew “from the beginning” who would betray him – namely Judas, whom Jesus calls a “devil” (cf. John 6:64–71). This fact is significant, since Judas was selected as an apostle even though Jesus knew that he was corrupt.

You’re supposed to get rid of people in the church who are immoral. Are you saying it does not apply to leaders?

1 Cor 5:9 I wrote to you in an epistle, not to keep company with fornicators. 10 I mean not with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or the extortioners, or the servers of idols; otherwise you must needs go out of this world. 11 But now I have written to you, not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or a server of idols, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat. 12 For what have I to do to judge them that are without ? Do not you judge them that are within ? 13 For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.

Another example would be found in Jesus’ teaching on “Moses’ seat” found in the opening verses of Matthew 23: “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: ‘The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.’” (Matthew 23:1-3)

“Moses’ seat” is a phrase that referred to a position of legitimate teaching authority held by the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. Later, Jesus condemned these men as “hypocrites,” “blind guides,” “blind fools,” “serpents,” and a “brood of vipers.” But in the passage above, Jesus specifically instructed the crowds and his disciples to obey these leaders – despite their corruption – because of the authority of their position. That is sobering stuff.

The Jews had to stay. There was only one Jewish religion then.

If it were true that immorality invalidated a religious leader’s authority, then why did Jesus command his followers to “obey and do everything” the scribes and Pharisees tell them? Jesus merely admonished his followers not to follow their hypocritical example. There is not even the slightest hint that their positions had been forfeited or abrogated because of their hypocrisy or immorality. If anything, the reverse is true because Jesus validated these leaders’ office by telling people to obey them. From this, we see that sin and corruption found in the individual office holders has no impact whatsoever on the authority of the office itself.

I encourage you to pray about this, Dalphon. Seriously. :sad_yes:

James 3:16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.

If the police commissioner is corrupt it corrupts the whole city. If my pastor is corrupt, it spreads to the whole church. I leave. I’ll be back when he is rehabilitated. But he’s not the only pastor there so if he goes crazy they’ll send him away and the other pastors will take over. When you have a pope that goes nuts you’re stuck with him.

There’s something very wrong about sitting under corruption. Ananias and Saphira were killed by the Holy Spirit for fooling around with church money.