Ecumenism: "Why Can't We Be Friends?"

[Fidei Defensor]

43 minutes ago, Churchmouse said:

I don't judge people who wish to be left alone, but I do judge those I wish to associate with as some of these go against what the Bible states and then justifies their actions by saying that the word of God is not enough.  I don't pray through Mary and I don't pray through the Saints because The Bible says what to do and neither of those are in the Bible. Having people in close proximity with others who believe in anything that is not scriptural based is to consciously allow the degrading of the word of God and I will not do that, because as a Christian, I am tasked to recount the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John not Larry, Moe,Curly and Shemp..

If this is so, why post? I mean if you have no intention of being around other Christians who have different views and belief, why join the discussion? I understand your concern, but if your beliefs of Solae Scriptura be true, shouldn't they prevail around Prima Scriptura? Are beliefs even beliefs if they aren't tested? I do not direct this next comment at you, but I wonder if we Christians become so isolated, first by running from world, and then from other Christians who do not see things the way we do, will we not find ourselves alone? Will not we then find fault with other Solae Scriptura brothers? And then shirk from their company, until we are either in a cult or hermits? Just as thought. I understand the zeal to stand for Truth (John 14:6, Acts 4:10-12) this thread is an ally of Truth, as I said my goal is not to run from Truth, but to rejoice in it and make a place for all Christians, whatever their rites, and denomination, to come together and talk.

You are entitled to your views of course, you are not obligated to share here. But I must confess, this divisiveness is not getting us closer to fulfilling Christ's words, "Let them be One as we are One." (John 17:20-23).

[warrior12]

While i commend you for stretching forth your hand to keep the chain all linked, there might be weak or pewter links that just do not belong or will compromise the strength and integrity of the chain that has to do yeoman's work.   Every man reading the Bible would have his thoughts ingrained in his conscious memory and would use those to respond to messages that is before him.  If what is before him does not line up with his reception of the word of God, then there is bound to be conflict.   And while you are right, in  that we are to dialogue with respect for each other, our core beliefs would not change and compromise cannot be achieved, especially in the realm of worship.  We can have barbecue, throw a joke here and there, but the seriousness of the gospel cannot have heretical and pagan doctrine included, it is just not allowed and the reason conflicts of reason would be on this site.   

[Churchmouse]

14 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

If this is so, why post? I mean if you have no intention of being around other Christians who have different views and belief, why join the discussion? I understand your concern, but if your beliefs of Solae Scriptura be true, shouldn't they prevail around Prima Scriptura? Are beliefs even beliefs if they aren't tested? I do not direct this next comment at you, but I wonder if we Christians become so isolated, first by running from world, and then from other Christians who do not see things the way we do, will we not find ourselves alone? Will not we then find fault with other Solae Scriptura brothers? And then shirk from their company, until we are either in a cult or hermits? Just as thought. I understand the zeal to stand for Truth (John 14:6, Acts 4:10-12) this thread is an ally of Truth, as I said my goal is not to run from Truth, but to rejoice in it and make a place for all Christians, whatever their rites, and denomination, to come together and talk.

You are entitled to your views of course, you are not obligated to share here. But I must confess, this divisiveness is not getting us closer to fulfilling Christ's words, "Let them be One as we are One." (John 17:20-23).

This is a thread to promote tolerance and uniformity of message that doesn't take into account what The Bible said, but mans understanding of religion, as if they were equal. You speak about fulfilling Christ's words, but this thread promotes the inclusion of those who think His father's words are not enough and that idea is an abomination to me. I will speak my mind because the Holy Spirit fills me with the drive to do so.

[Churchmouse]

3 minutes ago, Judas Machabeus said:

Yowm twice said he's leaving the thread yet gave Churchmouses post a rep point?!? 

This is from a thread in a different part of the forum I came across but it speaks to what I was saying in my previous post. The poster was requesting a sola scriptura only forum.

Quote: "I'm tired of bickering with those who hold to Church Tradition as equal authority as Scripture.

I don't have the finesse of being able to keep those discussions with them on a 'gentlemen's' level. It is too serious an issue. "

Yet this member continues to engage in these threads AND created a thread specifically to discuss one of these traditions. 

If you don't like the topic than don't engage and for goodness sake don't read the thread. Smh

And if you can not "keep those discussions with them on a 'gentlemen's' level" than your really ought to stay away from those topics.

Cheers

You are reported. It is not up to you to discuss the actions of other members here. If you have issues with this person, then take them up with them in a pm or speak to a staff member about what is going on. His response are his and what he agrees with is his. You are a member here as we all are and if you can't treat others with the same respect you can face the staff.

This idea that if someone doesn't like a thread then they don't need to comment follows the same politically correct philosophy as those who have tried to shut down debate and discussion since the world of politics was created.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

1 minute ago, Churchmouse said:

You are reported. It is not up to you to discuss the actions of other members here. If you have issues with this person, then take them up with them in a pm or speak to a staff member about what is going on. His response are his and what he agrees with is his. You are a member here as we all are and if you can't treat others with the same respect you can face the staff.

This idea that if someone doesn't like a thread then they don't need to comment follows the same politically correct philosophy as those who have tried to shut down debate and discussion since the world of politics was created.

I'm not sure what's worth reporting. The person I quoted was not named, even if I did name them..... the forum comes with a "quoting" feature so maybe you should report everyone that uses that feature. Because what I quoted was a public post for everyone to see and read.

As for my comment about Yowm, I made a simple observation.

i also did not say people are not allowed to engage or go into threads. I gave some advice that if it's that upsetting than it might be wise not to go and participate. 

But thank you for letting me and everyone else know that you reported me. i find it entertaining that you scould me and tell me to take it to PM if I have a problem with a member YET you do not do the same. You make it very public your issue with me. Does that mean I can report you??

 

[Churchmouse]

1 minute ago, Judas Machabeus said:

I'm not sure what's worth reporting. The person I quoted was not named, even if I did name them..... the forum comes with a "quoting" feature so maybe you should report everyone that uses that feature. Because what I quoted was a public post for everyone to see and read.

As for my comment about Yowm, I made a simple observation.

i also did not say people are not allowed to engage or go into threads. I gave some advice that if it's that upsetting than it might be wise not to go and participate. 

But thank you for letting me and everyone else know that you reported me. i find it entertaining that you scould me and tell me to take it to PM if I have a problem with a member YET you do not do the same. You make it very public your issue with me. Does that mean I can report you??

 

i let people know what I do out of being open and honest with others and informing those that seem not to know the rules. If you want to make a passive aggressive attack on my efforts here I will let you know as I have several others here know that I am not here to be liked by you or any other human being.  I'm not here to make a name for myself, but as it is that you made the effort to make a personal comment about a member here instead of commenting on the topic at hand I took it upon myself to defend him as I would defend you if the situation was reversed. You or anyone else who takes offense towards my actions can like it or dislike it at their leisure. As I've said I am not here to be liked. I serve a higher power.  J

Just for your information, since I am talking about you in this post instead of discussing the topic, I am breaking the rules as well and have reported myself. If you wish to do the same be my guest, but according to me and my conscience, the discussion with you is closed. Do what you will.

[Fidei Defensor]

I happen to think all Christians who believe in Trinity (which includes Catholics) and profess same statement of faith (Nicene Creed and Apostle's Creed) are Christian (because the creeds are based on the Bible, the councils formulated what makes an Orthodox/right believing Christian). But since it was complex to go through all the Scriptures, they devised Creeds  from the Scriptures. I find this useful, I especially like Newsboys abridged version, "I believe in God the Father, I believe in Jesus Christ, I believe in Holy Spirit whose given me new life (Catholics say this in Latin and English In Nomine et Patris, et Spirtis Fili, et Spirtus Sancti Amen: In the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Amen), I believe in Crucifixion, I believe that He conquered death, I believe in Resurrection, and He's coming back, He's coming back again." Granted the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds go into details Scripture affirms, I like how short this is, kind of like how short John 6:40 and Romans 10:9-10.

While I am Solae Scriptura, I have some Prima Scriptura in me, I believe in 12 Stations of Cross, Veronica and her veil, and other traditions that were witnessed by extra Biblical writers like Josephus, Eusebius, and Cisero. Their accounts don't contradict Scripture mind you, they affirm it. There are many parts in Bible where we have time elapsing without all the details, because the writers were about getting to point (Gospel and Teachings).

[Churchmouse]

13 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I happen to think all Christians who believe in Trinity (which includes Catholics) and profess same statement of faith (Nicene Creed and Apostle's Creed) are Christian (because the creeds are based on the Bible, the councils formulated what makes an Orthodox/right believing Christian). But since it was complex to go through all the Scriptures, they devised Creeds  from the Scriptures. I find this useful, I especially like Newsboys abridged version, "I believe in God the Father, I believe in Jesus Christ, I believe in Holy Spirit whose given me new life (Catholics say this in Latin and English In Nomine et Patris, et Spirtis Fili, et Spirtus Sancti Amen: In the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Amen), I believe in Crucifixion, I believe that He conquered death, I believe in Resurrection, and He's coming back, He's coming back again." Granted the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds go into details Scripture affirms, I like how short this is, kind of like how short John 6:40 and Romans 10:9-10.

While I am Solae Scriptura, I have some Prima Scriptura in me, I believe in 12 Stations of Cross, Veronica and her veil, and other traditions that were witnessed by extra Biblical writers like Josephus, Eusebius, and Cisero. Their accounts don't contradict Scripture mind you, they affirm it. There are many parts in Bible where we have time elapsing without all the details, because the writers were about getting to point (Gospel and Teachings).

I would think, by it's very nature Solae Scriptura is set in stone and anything beyond that would make that invalid, so I don't understand the point that you are trying to make.

[Fidei Defensor]

9 minutes ago, Churchmouse said:

I would think, by it's very nature Solae Scriptura is set in stone and anything beyond that would make that invalid, so I don't understand the point that you are trying to make.

The Councils are based on Solae Scriptura. Meaning the Bishops based the entire creeds that Catholics,  and other denominations believe:

 

[Churchmouse]

5 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

The Councils are based on Solae Scriptura. Meaning the Bishops based the entire creeds that Catholics,  and other denominations believe:

 

This does not address what I asked. Look, you want to slide in the words of something other than that which was influenced by God and what was granted absolute existence by God throughout the whole of the world, from the time of existence down to today, then you go for it, but you have him to confront when you exit this world. I stand on what I stand and will acept what I get from he who made me. My conscience is clear as to what I believe and who I welcome into association with. You have a nice day and I will pray for all of us.