Denominations?

[OneLight]

The point, which you keep ignoring, is that the church Jesus started was not the Roman Catholic Church, but His body of believers that had not real name. It was not until later that congregations started having names. You want to step back in time, but refuse to step all the way back. Jesus came to the Jewish people, not the Gentiles. You seem to forget that.

Did the apostles all belong to a single Church? If so, which Church was it? Have you read any of the history of the early Church?

The Apostles did not belong to any church. They taught in synagogues. They also taught in the streets and from house to house. They followed Jesus without a name. What they believed was call "The Way" in Acts. They were given a name of "Christians", which was supposed to be demeaning.

They all belonged to the Church built by Jesus.

Then you agree?

I agree that the apostles all belonged to the same Church. There was only one Church built by Jesus and there is still only one. Not all who follow Jesus are in full communion with his Church.

The church I speak of is His body of believers, not a denomination that you speak of. I agree that not all who are called to Him walk right in His ways. You have replaced Christ with the Roman Catholic Church, claiming they are one in the same, always comparing peoples beliefs to the Roman Catholic Church doctrine, and not Christ. You have built upon your alter an idol. It is very disheartening to see that after so many people have pointed this out that you are still blind and deaf to their words.

Why is it that Jesus tells us He will send us a helper, the Holy Spirit, yet you never point to Him, but to the RCC?

John 14:26

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 15:26

But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.

John 16:7

Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.

Jesus never said He would send us a pope or a church. That is because a pope is a man made authority and the church always has been His body of believers. It was not until after the fall of Jerusalem that Rome started to become the focal point, since Rome was responsible for the fall.

Brother, you can continue to follow the RCC and I will continue to follow how His Spirit leads me. When we stand before Him, we will know the full truth and not before.

In John 14-16 Jesus is tallking to the apostles, the leaders of the Church, not to you and I.

You don't have the authority to lead or teach the Christian faith if you have not been appointed by a successor of the apostles.

That is the furthest from the truth that I have seen you go to date. The Holy Spirit directs His people, not self appointed men. Does the Holy Spirit need their permission to give the gifts of teaching and set up the office of preachers and evangelists? As I said, continue to follow your traditions and I will continue to follow His Spirit. When we both stand before Him, He will let all truth be known to us.

[eis]

I disagree. We gain a better understanding of what he practiced, or thought should be practiced. The word baptizo, from which we get our word baptized, means "to make fully wet." Pouring water on someone will not make them fully wet. Didache is preaching something contrary to what God tells us in the Bible. Let us then disregard what he says.

I agree with you. There are many concepts and practices that are justified by writings of men that are not found in Scripture. Another thing gained from these writings are terminologies e.g. "sacraments" that are never found in the Word.

[nChrist]

Peter was an Apostle to the Circumcision (The Jews), and he taught the Gospel of the Kingdom because he knew nothing else.

That opinion is not biblical:

Acts 15

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

Wrong! - It's completely Biblical. The Twelve were Apostles to the Jews (Circumcision). The Apostle Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles (Uncircumcision). This is basic Bible facts. Peter knew nothing about the Church Which is the Body of Christ until Paul taught him.

You don't know what you are talking about.

The message of the gospel for gentiles was given directly to Peter from God in a dream. Peter preached the first sermon to gentiles. Paul had no authority in this matter which is why the Christians in Antioch sent Paul to Jerusalem to consult the apostles.

Peter didn't always follow his teachings as he should, and Paul rightly rebuked him for this, but that doesn't change the fact that this teaching originated in Peter's vision.

Where do you get this stuff?

Wrong, you don't have a clue. This is basic Bible Facts. I'll give you a hint and you can expand from there if you have a topical reference. You should already know this if you study God's Word.

Galatians 2:7-8 KJV But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

Again, the Twelve had no CLUE about the Church Which is the Body of Christ until the Apostle Paul taught them. You should be able to get it from here. Regardless, I'm not going to debate this with you.

[nebula]

Question:

How many times can people present the same arguments before they realize they aren't going to convince anyone with them?

[Dragoon]

Sorry to take so long to reply. I tend to lose track of some threads.

What you've given is the Catholic perspective... one that is not held by the Eastern Orthodox Church as far as I understand it.

"The Orthodox Church teaches that all bishops are equal."

"Orthodoxy teaches that every bishop, "the living icon of Christ," and his flock constitute the Church in a certain place; or, as St. Ignatius the God-bearer says, the Church of Christ is in the bishop, his priests and deacons, with the people, surrounding the Eucharist in the true faith. All bishops and their flocks so constituted, together composing the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church."

(http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html)

Might I suggest you read over what the Eastern Orthodox Church says upon the matter of Orthodox belief and Roman Catholic belief?

If you choose in good conscience and in your best understanding of Christ to follow the teachings and leadership of the Roman Catholic Church, then so be it.

Please do not propagate biased information in seeking to lead others down that path though.

I agree that I have given the Catholic perspective, but how did I illustrate this perspective?

I demonstrated that the early Eastern Fathers accepted the current Catholic view of the papacy.

This proves that there was a change in the Eastern Church at some point and that the Catholic Church has maintained the position of the early Church.

I suggest you take this up with Eastern Orthodox believers, as they would strongly disagree with you. One would think they know their beliefs and positions better than you would.

If you choose to follow church 'fathers', saints and popes, then you are entirely welcome to. When I read your posts though, it does not inspire love for the Roman Catholic church, but rather a deep sadness that men would love human traditions vs. our Father.

How could they disagree with the quotes I provided from Eastern Fathers?

Did you even read the quotes? Why bring up a point if you don't even care about the Truth of the matter?

How could they disagree? Perhaps you should follow the link to the Orthodox website I posted and read for yourself.

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Truth? Yes, I care passionately about the Truth, and the Truth is Jesus Christ.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

The point, which you keep ignoring, is that Jesus started a single Church. There was no such thing as the Orthodox Church for several hundred years after Christ walked the earth.

Jesus is the way, and he started a Church to guide us.

Yes, Jesus Christ started a single church...

and as you know, the word church is a translation of the Greek ekklesia.

ekklesia means those who are 'called out'/'assembled'/'a congregation'. It is a false modern usage to use it for a building. Christ created a single church of those he called out, and these faithful believers who follow Him are the church; the body of Christ.

The church never meant a body of men under a human leader.

And please don't be silly, there wasn't even a Roman Catholic church until hundreds of years after Christ. There was only a Bishop of Rome who stood with other Bishops competing for primacy. Why do you think Paul goes to Jerusalem and not to Rome to speak to 'those who seemed to be leaders' (Gal 2:2)

You also are contradicting yourself.

Denominations came 1500 years later.

You now adjust that to say, "for several hundred years", which is very different.

Now that we've gone over ground that people have repeatedly gone over with you yet again, would you stop with the propaganda for the Roman Catholic church. If you desire to follow a Pope and claim he speaks for Christ, then so be it.

I'll stick with Christ Himself with no middle man.

[OneLight]

Please read the chapters for yourself. Jesus was alone with the apostles. His words were not meant to authorize us for leadership.

Jesus established a Church and he gave his Church leadership. The rest of us are to follow the message of these leaders, not create our own message.

John 17

Jesus prays for his chosen disciples:

14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. 15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. 17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. 19 For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.

Jesus Prays for All Believers:

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

When Christ spoke to the Apostles, only they had been chosen at that time to receive the truth, just as they were the only ones who were given the Holy Spirit before His Resurrection. That does not mean that nobody ever received the Holy Spirit after His resurrection or that the Holy Spirit was only for the Apostles. I will agree that up to His Resurrection, only the Apostles were taught by His Spirit and given the power by the Spirit to do what they were commanded to do, but when Christ was Resurrected, He sent the Holy Spirit to all who believed. If what you say were true, then ever incident recorded in scripture pertaining to the Holy Spirit and the saved would be a lie and would have to be removed, yet it is not so it is the truth.

Why do you think the Holy Spirit set up offices and gave gifts to His Body if they were only meant for the Apostles? Even Peter claimed there was no difference and that He gave the Holy Spirit to everyone just as He gave His Spirit to them ... "So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith."

You are taught that the only truth has to come down from the Pope, so you look at His words a lot different then if you had a full relationship with Him. You relationship stops when it moves into the understanding of scripture apart from what you have been taught, not daring to question the "authority" you have accepted to be under. There is only one authority and that is God. God does speak to each of us and teach each of us. You keep speaking of each of us having our own message, which we do not. We each claim Christ to be the only begotten Son of the Father, born of a virgin, died for our sins and rose again on the third day, that He is now at the right hand of the Father. Yet, just as within the walls of the RCC, there are people who do not agree with each other about every aspect of scripture. Does this mean the scripture has changed for each person? No, it just means we are human and do not have the ability to completely hear and understand everything in scripture. This also includes all men, be it a new Christian or your Pope. We are all human and will not completely understand everything in scripture until we are with Him.

Please tell me where you find in scripture backing for this statement "You don't have the authority to lead or teach the Christian faith if you have not been appointed by a successor of the apostles." when we read in 1 Corinthians that "There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all." I understand that God sets up the authority according to His will, but He never tells us that only a few have been given the ability to be taught by His Spirit.

Do you really believe that God would send the Holy Spirit to give gifts and set up offices while not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them and teach them?

[OneLight]

Do you really believe that God would send the Holy Spirit to give gifts and set up offices while not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them and teach them?

Of course the Holy Spirit guides us and teaches us. However, it does not contradict the Church.

The Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion. Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit.

Are they?

You statement above places the church above the Holy Spirit when you say "However, it does not contradict the Church.", besides calling the Holy Spirit "it' as if He was not God. You have it backwards. The Church should not contradict the Holy Spirit. This is the type of false teaching many here have been pointing out to you each time you post that the RCC is the final authority, which it is not.

As you have so plainly shown, your belief brings in may false teachings causing confusion among many. You choose to ignore His authority by following what you have been taught as "the truth" from the RCC. When ever you find yourself in a weak position, you play the trump card of "Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit." which is, at best, a blanket statement.

Why do you neglect to answer my other questions?

[OneLight]

Do you really believe that God would send the Holy Spirit to give gifts and set up offices while not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them and teach them?

Of course the Holy Spirit guides us and teaches us. However, it does not contradict the Church.

The Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion. Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit.

Are they?

You statement above places the church above the Holy Spirit when you say "However, it does not contradict the Church.", besides calling the Holy Spirit "it' as if He was not God. You have it backwards. The Church should not contradict the Holy Spirit. This is the type of false teaching many here have been pointing out to you each time you post that the RCC is the final authority, which it is not.

As you have so plainly shown, your belief brings in may false teachings causing confusion among many. You choose to ignore His authority by following what you have been taught as "the truth" from the RCC. When ever you find yourself in a weak position, you play the trump card of "Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit." which is, at best, a blanket statement.

Why do you neglect to answer my other questions?

The Church is led by the Holy Spirit and teaches a single, unifed doctrine of Truth.

Protestantism, on the other hand, teaches multiple contradictory doctrines based on the ideas of individual men.

Still neglecting to address my questions, but that does not surprise me one bit. You have no answer.

The RCC does follow one doctrine, but it is man made doctrine. Many times people have pointed to the contradictions the RCC has with scripture, but they all fell on deaf ears and blind eyes. I will agree with your premise, your RCC is just one church where the Protestants have many, so you can divide and point fingers. That said, the RCC, though unified, are not the holders of "the Truth", as you claim, but the holder of their truth.

[Smalcald]

But Protestantism is not a Church.

It depends on your view of what the Church is in particular. There are many non-Catholic Churches that are apostate so yeah if you include them we have some real problems.

The core Truth of Christ has indeed been brought to us by the Apostles and is taught in truth in many Churches. Minor contradictions don't take away from that fact.

[OneLight]

Do you really believe that God would send the Holy Spirit to give gifts and set up offices while not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them and teach them?

Of course the Holy Spirit guides us and teaches us. However, it does not contradict the Church.

The Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion. Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit.

Are they?

You statement above places the church above the Holy Spirit when you say "However, it does not contradict the Church.", besides calling the Holy Spirit "it' as if He was not God. You have it backwards. The Church should not contradict the Holy Spirit. This is the type of false teaching many here have been pointing out to you each time you post that the RCC is the final authority, which it is not.

As you have so plainly shown, your belief brings in may false teachings causing confusion among many. You choose to ignore His authority by following what you have been taught as "the truth" from the RCC. When ever you find yourself in a weak position, you play the trump card of "Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings. Those who teach these contradictory things claim to be led by the Holy Spirit." which is, at best, a blanket statement.

Why do you neglect to answer my other questions?

The Church is led by the Holy Spirit and teaches a single, unifed doctrine of Truth.

Protestantism, on the other hand, teaches multiple contradictory doctrines based on the ideas of individual men.

Still neglecting to address my questions, but that does not surprise me one bit. You have no answer.

The RCC does follow one doctrine, but it is man made doctrine. Many times people have pointed to the contradictions the RCC has with scripture, but they all fell on deaf ears and blind eyes. I will agree with your premise, your RCC is just one church where the Protestants have many, so you can divide and point fingers. That said, the RCC, though unified, are not the holders of "the Truth", as you claim, but the holder of their truth.

Jesus built only a single Church and this Church is being led into all truth by the successors of the apostles.

Protestantism is full of contradictory teachings and therefore it cannot be this Church.

Ah, this is the part of the circle where I say "The point, which you keep ignoring, is that the church Jesus started was not the Roman Catholic Church, but His body of believers that had not real name. It was not until later that congregations started having names. You want to step back in time, but refuse to step all the way back. Jesus came to the Jewish people, not the Gentiles. You seem to forget that. "

Did I get it right?

Why do you continue to dodge my questions?