-Are Christians today still Protestants?

[d.n.irvin]

It's this little thing called "history."

And yes I mean the whole Bible.

I don't understand your saying. Are you saying the Jews didn't have scripture before the council?

 

[Scott1]

you mean indoctrinate don't you,

Ummm... ok.

Hey, how about this.... instead of posting what you think Roman Catholic teaching is, I'll be right here so you can ask me. Fair enough?

That all depends upon your understanding of the title "Vicar of Christ" - which is still one of his titles -according to your encyclopedia

EVERY Bishop is a vicar of Christ:
As Christ's vicar, each bishop has the pastoral care of the particular Church entrusted to him, but at the same time he bears collegially with all his brothers in the episcopacy the solicitude for all the Churches: "Though each bishop is the lawful pastor only of the portion of the flock entrusted to his care, as a legitimate successor of the apostles he is, by divine institution and precept, responsible with the other bishops for the apostolic mission of the Church."CCC #1560

and the Bishop of Rome has a unique, SCRIPTURALLY BASED claim to be vicar:
The Lord made St. Peter the visible foundation of his Church. He entrusted the keys of the Church to him. The bishop of the Church of Rome, successor to St. Peter, is "head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the universal Church on earth".CCC #936

.... and each Christian person is vicar in a special way:
Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise. . . . [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ. CCC #1778
So.... let's see if you can accept this and move on to your next question.

May the Immaculate Virgin and Mother of God bless you and keep you,
S

 

[Booko]

Most certainly, But before I answer you,take a look around the "Christian world" and ask any of the followers of Christ ( not a church) are all Ten Commandments still binding?

Why do you think there are only 10 commandments?

Turn the page. You're missing about 600 other ones.

 

[Booko]

I don't understand your saying. Are you saying the Jews didn't have scripture before the council?

Why don't you drop in the Judaism area and ask them.

Your bible, however, has a canon defined by a *Catholic* group and approved by them. They decided which Jewish texts to use and which not to use in Christian Bibles.

Really, this is the most basic historical knowledge regarding the history of the texts.

 

[Scott1]

Your bible, however, has a canon defined by a *Catholic* group and approved by them. They decided which Jewish texts to use and which not to use in Christian Bibles.

Very good, my favorite chicken!

It's funny that so many Christians who are "bible based" have no clue about their own faith and the origin of the book they worship.

The Protestant canon (used by 95%) is based upon the canon changed by the JEWS after the destruction of the temple.... at the time they were VERY anti-Christian and removed several books (like Maccabees) that clearly tought Christian teachings.... and yet these Protestants blindly hold onto their bible not knowing the books they are missing were removed by a group that hated them (at the time).... boggles the mind, don't it!!!????

 

[d.n.irvin]

Truce please, I promise - I am NOT, I repeat, I am NOT trying to attack, defame, belittle, (or any other negative adjective you can use) the Faith of any person in this forum.
I make post in this forum to understand from other Faiths- their scriptural justification for not following the whole Bible.

Ummm... ok.

Hey, how about this.... instead of posting what you think Roman Catholic teaching is, I'll be right here so you can ask me. Fair enough?
Agreed

EVERY Bishop is a vicar of Christ:
Can this statement be supported with scripture?
As Christ's vicar, each bishop has the pastoral care of the particular Church entrusted to him, but at the same time he bears collegially with all his brothers in the episcopacy the solicitude for all the Churches: "Though each bishop is the lawful pastor only of the portion of the flock entrusted to his care, as a legitimate successor of the apostles he is, by divine institution and precept, responsible with the other bishops for the apostolic mission of the Church."CCC #1560
Vicar : (Latin vicarius, from vice, "instead of"

of


Christ: [SIZE=-1]The incarnate Son of God and the redeemer of the human race.[/SIZE]


and the Bishop of Rome has a unique,SCRIPTURALLY BASED claim to be vicar:
The Lord made St. Peter the visible foundation of his Church. He entrusted the keys of the Church to him. The bishop of the Church of Rome, successor to St. Peter, is "head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the universal Church on earth".CCC #936
And that is all that this Title means to you?
.... and each Christian person is vicar in a special way:
Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise. . . . [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ. CCC #1778
Conscience like: 'let your conscience be your guide'?

So.... let's see if you can accept this and move on to your next question.
I can accept anything supported by scripture. Please give me scriptural evidence to support the above claims
May the Immaculate Virgin and Mother of God bless you and keep you,
S

 

[Katzpur]

The Pope holds the same office that St. Peter did in the Early Church, the Patriarch, the man who leads the Church in terms of Earthly affairs under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

If I believed that, I'd be a Catholic.

 

[d.n.irvin]

Very good, my favorite chicken!

It's funny that so many Christians who are "bible based" have no clue about their own faith and the origin of the book they worship.

The Protestant canon (used by 95%) is based upon the canon changed by the JEWS after the destruction of the temple.... at the time they were VERY anti-Christian and removed several books (like Maccabees) that clearly tought Christian teachings.... and yet these Protestants blindly hold onto their bible not knowing the books they are missing were removed by a group that hated them (at the time).... boggles the mind, don't it!!!????

Which lends more creditability to the fact that Catholics full and well know that the Seventh-Day of th week is the true Sabbath -the Day God Rested on Hallowed and Sanctified- Since they are the ones that put the Bible together- So why the Day change?

 

[MaddLlama]

Which lends more creditability to the fact that Catholics full and well know that the Seventh-Day of th week is the true Sabbath -the Day God Rested on Hallowed and Sanctified- Since they are the ones that put the Bible together- So why the Day change?

They did it just to make you angry, I think.

 

[d.n.irvin]

[/color][/size]Why do you think there are only 10 commandments?

Turn the page. You're missing about 600 other ones.

Because God only spoke and wrote 10

 

[MaddLlama]

Because God only spoke and wrote 10

Try telling that to Moses (or the Jews, for that matter).

Methinks someone has been watching too much Charelton Heston.

Everyone knows God gave Moses 15 commandments.

 

[lunamoth]

Everyone knows God gave Moses 15 commandments.

The third tablet was too heavy to carry down the mountain?

 

[MaddLlama]

The third tablet was too heavy to carry down the mountain?

Yep, and he broke it on the way down.

Commandment number 11 was "Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself".

 

[d.n.irvin]

The Bible Speaks of 2 great "laws"


1. The Law of God (10 Commandments) or two tablets of the testimony") also known as the Moral Law, the Law of Love, and the Decalogue.

2. The Law of Moses (the "Book of the Law", or "Book of the Covenant"), also known as the Ceremonial Law and the Mosaic Law.
The Ten Commandments are of God - The Book of the Law was written by Moses.
Why is there so much confusion?

 

[lunamoth]

The Bible Speaks of 2 great "laws"


1. The Law of God (10 Commandments) or two tablets of the testimony") also known as the Moral Law, the Law of Love, and the Decalogue.

2. The Law of Moses (the "Book of the Law", or "Book of the Covenant"), also known as the Ceremonial Law and the Mosaic Law.
The Ten Commandments are of God - The Book of the Law was written by Moses.
Why is there so much confusion?

Hmmmm and I always thought the two greatest were these:

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[b] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

 

[Smoke]

When people who aren't Catholic claim their church goes back to the 1st century, i always take it as a matter of their faith rather than take it as a serious factual statement, simply because the claim has absolutely no historical basis.

Surely you meant to say, people who aren't Catholic, Orthodox, or Assyrian.

From an entirely personal position I would state that any religion believing in sola scriptura, sola fide, and a priesthood of all believers would fit into protestantism, such as Quakerism.

Quakers, other than Evangelical Friends, don't necessarily believe in any of those things.

Sunday worship has been the custom from the begining.... we're not a Jewish sect and have our own Sabbath.

Eastern Orthodox Christians still consider Saturday the Sabbath, though they obviously don't observe the Sabbath. Sunday is the Lord's Day, not the Sabbath.

 

[Booko]

Truce please, I promise - I am NOT, I repeat, I am NOT trying to attack, defame, belittle, (or any other negative adjective you can use) the Faith of any person in this forum.
I make post in this forum to understand from other Faiths- their scriptural justification for not following the whole Bible.

It is your assumption and possibly your belief that they don't follow the whole Bible. It is not a fact.

And your continued insistence that Christians don't follow the Bible just because they don't follow one little thing the way YOU do is, if I may so, mighty insulting.

Telling other people what their religion really teaches doesn't help much either. I doubt anyone expects you or anyone else to be an expert on what another faith or denomination teaches, but after repeated corrections when you keep putting the same inaccurate stuff out there, that doesn't say much either.

Do unto others, and all that.

If you really want to understand faiths, why not ask questions and ask others what they believe instead of telling them what they believe and being dead wrong in what you're telling them?

 

[d.n.irvin]

It is your assumption and possibly your belief that they don't follow the whole Bible. It is not a fact.
The Fact is, most of the Christian world -that have Bibles readily available to read -regardless of denomination or creed- haven't even read the whole Bible - let alone follow the Whole Bible.

You say,"How can I say that" I'll prove my point to you Booko like this, When you read and studied the Prophecies of Daniel And Revelation - what is your personal analysis on those prophecies - as it compares to Salvation and the times in which we live?

And your continued insistence that Christians don't follow the Bible just because they don't follow one little thing the way YOU do is, if I may so, mighty insulting.
I have done nothing but echo the Bible -the Seventh-Day Sabbath is in the Bible- Most Christians don't follow this teaching -your beef is with the Bible not me.

Telling other people what their religion really teaches doesn't help much either. I doubt anyone expects you or anyone else to be an expert on what another faith or denomination teaches, but after repeated corrections when you keep putting the same inaccurate stuff out there, that doesn't say much either.

I not telling other people anything, And I guess you think I'm trying to convert you too, another misconception. My point is and will be CHRISTIANS follow Christs example in all areas of Life. Please point out my inaccuracy and I will try to correct them.
Do unto others, and all that.

If you really want to understand faiths, why not ask questions and ask others what they believe instead of telling them what they believe and being dead wrong in what you're telling them?

That is the point, should I have to ask"Christians"- since there is only one Christ and one Bible- about there Faith - ALL Christians follow Christ the Apostles and their examples - right. Hence the name Christian.
Booko, tell me what Revelation has to say about CHURCHES wanting to be called by Christ's name but not wanting to to abide by his rules.

You know I talked to a person once that told me that, "No one can understand Daniel and Revelation so we don't even teach from- or study those books in our church". She meant her denomination. That is in part why I made the claim about "following the whole Bible.
Now you Booko, have a chance to prove me wrong since I assume you have implied that you follow the whole Bible- give me your comparative analysis of Daniel & Revelation.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Prior to the Synod of Whitby AD644, The British Isles followed mainly the Celtic Christian Tradition and not the rule of Rome.
The first recorded Christian activity in the Isles is in the first century. This indicates that the Christian traditions were deeply embedded before the population slowly became " Roman Catholics "
It would be wrong to suppose that "Celtic Christians " ever completely died out, but they reached their low point in the 19th century.

There is Little doubt that the Church of England was to at least "some extent" influenced by the Celtic Church after it broke from Rome.

There are to day Celtic Churches throughout the world that do not form part of the Church of Rome. Some are new, but some have tenuous links with the past.

It would be difficult to categorise them to be in either the Catholic or protestant camps, as they have their own traditions and never needed to break from Rome.

 

[d.n.irvin]

Hmmmm and I always thought the two greatest were these:

That depends on your analysis of the scriptures. I know I gonna get some "flack" of this, but it seems as though Most of the people that reply to my post- don't actually STUDY the Bible. It seems as though They are only interested in what their Church teaches. I say that in part because of the "responses" given to the posts that I have made

I also addressed the that in another post.