Why do protestants have such varied understanding of what the Bible say's and actually means?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What I said ALL ALONG

There are several groups with apostolic succession who trace their history back to the Apostles.
All of these groups are considered Christian.
Assyrian Church of the East
Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox
Catholic

This is not my spin. Where was my history proven wrong?? No where. There is nothing to prove wrong LOL. Its common knowledge…or should be…that these groups all trace their churches back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church does not question that. I am sure some of you have already googled and found out the Pope meets with the leaders of these respective churches on many occasions.
Some people tried to correct me about basic history. Go back and read for yourself:shrug:
Uncharitable…is being presumptious enough to correct someone when they have said nothing controversial or particularly new…
 
larkin31 said:
True, but you even brought up what kind of day you are having, and what your mood is like…

but the topic is schism and church debate, which go back to the beginning, and members of the church have indeed disagreed and not been of one mind. This is no surprise, of course.
Click to expand...
Yes, because of the personal attacks or ad hominem worded statements directed towards me by a fellow Christian.

Your second paragraph is correct, but scriptures tell us to be of the same mind and judgment. That should address the dissenters.

**Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. **

My point being, because some dissented did not make them right. It made them those we should take note of.
 
BrianH said:
Truly believe what? Listen, I am in no mood to give history lessons. It appears, and if I am wrong, show me where. That certain Catholics are not aware that there were schisms prior to the Great Schism. If that is the case, some people have no business typing on the internet. They need to read some more before they feel they know history well enough to correct other people…who were RIGHT :mad:
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is because most Western Christians tend to focus on the “Great” Schism between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and forget about the other “Great” Schism of the Non-Chalcedonian Churches (the “Oriental Orthodox”) which occurred hundreds of years before the East/West Schism. If anything, it is interesting to note the schism of the Patriarchate of Alexandria (becoming the Coptic Orthodox) and how it relates to the formation of the Coptic Catholic Church, and how they view the Council of Chalcedon.

But you’re right, there were splits before the Great Schism, with the schism of the Oriental Orthodox being a/the major one (along with the Nestorian Schism producing the Church of the East). The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are also the two largest churches, so that may also be why many are only aware of that schism.
 
TheosisM said:
Perhaps it is because most Western Christians tend to focus on the “Great” Schism between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and forget about the other “Great” Schism of the Non-Chalcedonian Churches (the “Oriental Orthodox”) which occurred hundreds of years before the East/West Schism. If anything, it is interesting to note the schism of the Patriarchate of Alexandria (becoming the Coptic Orthodox) and how it relates to the formation of the Coptic Catholic Church, and how they view the Council of Chalcedon.

But you’re right, there were splits before the Great Schism, with the schism of the Oriental Orthodox being a/the major one (along with the Nestorian Schism producing the Church of the East). The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are also the two largest churches, so that may also be why many are only aware of that schism.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed.
 
BrianH said:
What I said ALL ALONG

There are several groups with apostolic succession who trace their history back to the Apostles.
All of these groups are considered Christian.
Assyrian Church of the East
Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox
Catholic

This is not my spin. Where was my history proven wrong?? No where. There is nothing to prove wrong LOL. Its common knowledge…or should be…that these groups all trace their churches back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church does not question that. I am sure some of you have already googled and found out the Pope meets with the leaders of these respective churches on many occasions.
Some people tried to correct me about basic history. Go back and read for yourself:shrug:
Uncharitable…is being presumptious enough to correct someone when they have said nothing controversial or particularly new…
Click to expand...
Read your posts again Brian. It’s not your attempts of ‘correction’ but your forcing your corrections, and comments directed at me, that is uncharitable.

Catholics accept those from the great schism as having a valid apostolic succession, BECAUSE they were a part of the ONE Apostolic Church prior to the great schism. Since the great schism, their dates of ‘schism’ have been slanted to separate themselves even further, or in attempts to invalidate those that they were APART of. Either way, all of them were affected by the ‘reformation’, as they are all rejected by most of today’s Protestants because they share many common beliefs.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Read your posts again Brian. It’s not your attempts of ‘correction’ but your forcing your corrections, and comments directed at me, that is uncharitable.

Catholics accept those from the great schism as having a valid apostolic succession, BECAUSE they were a part of the ONE Apostolic Church prior to the great schism. Since the great schism, their dates of ‘schism’ have been slanted to separate themselves even further, or in attempts to invalidate those that they were APART of. Either way, all of them were affected by the ‘reformation’, as they are all rejected by most of today’s Protestants because they share many common beliefs.
Click to expand...
If you look closely, you’ll see there was one Church until the great schism. Then each side accused the other, to the extent of excommunicating each other. Prior to the great schism, there was only one Church. Either way, most all Catholics view either as being of the ‘Catholic Church’, or the Apostolic Church.
Click to expand...
We know that the
Assyrian Church of the East and the Oriental Orthodox were prior to the Great Schism. Right?
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
And there are those who prefer to choose any side that disagrees with the Catholic Church of course…
Click to expand...
“Any side”? I hardly see how that could be true. But I suppose that it could be possible, however unlikely. Especially among fellow Christians. 🤷

Which thread was this again?
 
=BrianH;6414600]Assyrian Church of the East
Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox
Click to expand...
Thank you my friend; however I did specify “other than Catholic” which these most certainly were; by specifying “non-Catholic”.

However, there is clear Biblical evidence that none of these can claim legitimately, historically or even logicaly to have been the precise and only Church Christ founded.

Why: Here are two indispuitable facts:
  1. Notice the specificty of where Jesus was [with I might add specific intent for chosing this location], when He Founded His First, One and Only Church-Faith-Religion. In v. 13.
[13] Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesare’a Philip’pi, he asked his disciples, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” [15] He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” [16] Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church [SINGULAR], and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you [Again SINGULAR] the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

"Caesare’a Philip’pi" is NOT located in any of the areas you mentioned.
  1. The [SNGULAR] Church was Founded [formed and started by Jesus Himself; and its was already this Jesus formed Church based in Jerusalem that was passed on to the guideance, growth and free and complete governance by Christ to Peter.
**Eph. 2: 19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [SINGULAR] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, [21] in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple [SINGULAR] in the Lord;"

Mk. 11:15 "And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons;** 27 **And they came again to Jerusalem. And as he was walking in the temple, the chief priests and the scribes and the elders came to him,

Luke.6: 17 “And he came down with them and stood on a level place, with a great crowd of his disciples and a great multitude of people from all Judea and Jerusalem and the seacoast of Tyre and Sidon, who came to hear him and to be healed of their diseases;”

**Luke.18: 31 **"And taking the twelve, he said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written of the Son of man by the prophets will be accomplished.”

**John.2: 13 **“The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem”

**Acts.1: 4 **"***And while staying with them he [The Ressurected Jesus] charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me, But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Sama’ria and to the end of the earth.”"
***Clearly the Church started and passed on to Peter was in Jerusalem; not in the East which came as part of the dispersement commanded by Christ: *** Matt.28 Verses 19 to 20: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

There you go,

God’s continued Blessings,

Pat
 
Hi wmscott,
=wmscott;6407905]
Thank you for helping me to make my point. “There is no monolithic Protestantism” and to that end “Protestantism as a whole” is fragmented with no unifying, universal, authoritative body.
Click to expand...
There never has been a monolithic, institutional “Protestant Church”. Therefore, it cannot be said that one (which never existed) is splintered, unless one is saying that, since they all are of Rome, that the whole of the western Church is splintered.
This is the sad fact of Christ’s church being divided in a way Christ never intended. Christ intended that His Church would be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.
Click to expand...
Yes, agreed. The Schism and the Reformation, and the resulting divisions are wounds to His Church. We must all work and pray for reconciliation.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top