Wake up. It is not Mary who forgives sins, in the confessional it is not the priest that forgives sin, it is Jesus. The Rosary is a recital of Jesus' actions in the Gospel. As a prayer it is meant to aid in reaching metanoia (change of heart), aid to reconciliation.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Protestants don't know their Bible!
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
Wake up. It is not Mary who forgives sins, in the confessional it is not the priest that forgives sin, it is Jesus. The Rosary is a recital of Jesus' actions in the Gospel. As a prayer it is meant to aid in reaching metanoia (change of heart), aid to reconciliation.
Spiderman
Veteran Member
Mary is alive and well in heaven. She is called the mother of those who keep the commandments of God, in revelation 12.
The Kingdom of God is made up of many souls who outnumber the people on earth.
Scripture says that we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses!
The "woman" per Revelation 12:1, who had a crown of 12 stars, referred to the church which actually kept the commandments of God and held to the testimony of Yeshua, and would be protected from the serpent/dragon, who "deceives the whole world" (Rev 12:9) by way of the beast (Revelation13), which includes the Roman empire, on whom the "Christian" church, the daughters of Babylon sits (Rev 17:3). The woman would be protected for time, times, and half a time (Rev 12:14 & Daniel 7:25-26) until the dominion (Roman Church of Constantine) of the another king is destroyed. Mary died, and was buried. She will have to wait for the millennium to get resurrected (Rev 20:4). If you are looking for what the "Kingdom of heaven" is, look to Matthew 13. If you are looking for what the "kingdom of God" is, look to Ezekiel 37. They are both "at the door"/"near" (Matthew 24:33). As for the "day and the hour no one knows" (Mt 24:36).
Five Solas
Active Member
It is true, Catholics are notorious for not knowing Scripture well. But having spent time at monasteries, where you go to daily Mass, and hear more Scripture read to you over a period of 6 months than attending Protestant services for years, and getting to know Catholics who actually know their Bible, it is remarkable.
A catholic who knows their Bible can easily defeat a Protestant in a debate! In fact, I have seen Protestants who knew their Bible really well, it lead them into the Catholic Church, and then they debate with a Protestant on EWTN, and they win the debate so easily, it looked like Muhammad Ali in the ring with a poodle (total and complete victory for the Catholic), because the entire basis for the Protestants argument, the foundation, was completely unbiblical!
Here is why: Protestantism is is actually a system of Religion that is built on a foundation that blows up on it's own. Protestantism is based off of Sola scriptura Doctrine that is found no where in Scripture. Many Protestants often say, "we only follow the Bible". But they have no basis for doing so. The Bible doesn't say to do that!
In fact, Scripture says the opposite. Scripture makes it very clear that people need an official interpreter of Scripture, and that people twist Scripture to their own destruction.
Matthew 18 "tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." So, the Bible says nothing about using the Bible as the final authority on anything. The Bible actually makes it clear that to do so is dangerous and destructive. The Bible says to listen to and obey the Church.
The first Christians were not Bible Christians! That is clearly obvious! The Bible is a Catholic book that was not available to anyone until the Catholic Church councils at Rome, Carthage, and Hippo.
Every Christian Church on the face of the earth had devotion to Mary and the Saints for over 1500 years, and to me I tend to believe that if Christ is a man of his word, he would shepherd his Church better than that, if such practices were an abomination.
Most Protestants deny that Mary is "Mother of God", stating that every Christian Church on earth was mistaken , and was Idolatrous, and most Protestants believe veneration of Mary and Saints is Demonic. That is thoroughly depressing and nauseating (in my opinion), because when I try to look at history that way, I see God look evil, pathetic, a thoroughly terrible Father in my opinion, a thoroughly terrible shepherd, and a liar who can't be trusted, because he abandoned Christians, and let all Churches on earth (for over 1500 years) fall into demonic practice.
Nothing against Protestants, because I'm sure many Protestants are more holy, better people than myself. But when I try to see history from that point of view, that all churches on earth were sanctioning prayers to demons + Satanic abominations, I simply find it incompatible with a loving responsible God, who is faithful to his word.
Jesus had a biological earthly mother at the nativity, one mother who nursed, breastfed God, one mother who gave birth to God, one mother the Angel said "Hail full of grace, rejoice highly favored one". Scripture calls Mary "The Mother of my Lord" google "who am I that the mother of my Lord should visit me", Scripture says "all generations shall call Mary blessed", the hail Mary is a Biblical prayer.
Scripture says "the word was God...the word became flesh and dwelt among us", Jesus is God.
Protestants sometimes teach erroneous Doctrines that seem to deny the Divinity of Christ, which the Bible says otherwise.
Mary was at the foot of the cross with Christ. Jesus told John, "son behold thy mother."
Scripture says in revelation, a sign in the sky, a woman standing on the Moon, clothed with the Sun, on her head a crown of stars. Scripture says the woman is the mother of those who follow God's commandments. She battles the Dragon. Revelation 12. The Mother of God.
Many people claim to be a friend of Christ, yet they genuinely despise his bride, the Church!
I have difficult time trusting such people. It would seem those who cause division and confusion, are teaching dangerous Doctrines (according to the Gospel) that were not part of Christianity for over 1500 years , and divide and confuse Christians. Just what Satan would want (assuming he exists), divide the flock so he can conquer.
Jesus promised he built his Church on Peter, first Bishop of Rome (Pope) and the promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against her. Some people make Jesus look like the most incompetent shepherd there ever was, waiting over 1500 years to build a Church that wasn't a Satanic abomination.
Furthermore, what I have seen from following the Bible alone Doctrine, is a confusing mess (in my opinion), with no unity, and easily the worst affliction to ever strike Christianity! To divide and conquer , would be the strategy of the Devil, and there is much evidence to suggest that nothing has done more to confuse and divide the flock than the UNBIBLICAL Sola Scriptura Doctrine that Protestantism was founded on.
Some protestants also refer to the Catholic Church as "Prostitute, Whore of Babylon, Religion of the Antichrist"! This is extremely judgmental and sometimes becomes very hateful, condemning over a billion Christians as being hell bound followers of Satan and the Antichrist's whore of Babylon. When I try to see things through that lense, I get very depressed, and feel terrible about God.
Some Protestants often deny that Jesus was really present in the Eucharist. Jesus never said the bread and wine was a representation of his body and blood. He said "This is my body, this is my blood". The lamb in the Old Testament had to be eaten. Jesus was the lamb of God who said "unless you eat of the flesh , and drink of the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you". (John 6)
It was the first time in Christ's ministry where he lost followers. It was over that teaching. The people who abandoned Christ in John 6 fall into the same error and Heresy as Protestants who deny or attack the Catholic teaching about the Eucharist!
And keep in mind. The people who abandoned Christ over the teaching about the Eucharist and Holy Communion, were not people that Jesus called back. Jesus didn't say "Wait a minute, I didn't mean literally. Please, let me explain. I meant bread and wine that represents me". Neither did Jesus at the last supper say anything about it representing anything, in any of the last supper accounts. It was completely literal words in all accounts, in all Gospels. He never once used words of symbolism!
Some people who call themselves Christian are being completely unbiblical and are at war with the teachings of Jesus Christ in every Gospel. Some "Bible Christians" are opposed to the word of God! Some protestants are actually opposed to one of the most important teachings of Jesus. Jesus said that those who refuse to embrace that teaching have no life in them, are spiritually bankrupt, are spiritually dead.
I don't agree with Christ, but those were his strong words and a warning to people who push what many protestants are pushing, to cut people off, and alienate them from God and grace!
In the world book encyclopedia, a non Catholic book, there is an unbreakable chain of Popes dating back to Peter, first Bishop of Rome. The second was Linus in 67 AD. Protestants have no evidence that I know of for valid sacramental priesthood, Bishops, or valid sacrament of ordination. The Catholic Bishops, Pope, and priesthood, can trace itself back to Peter and the Apostles.
View attachment 61927 View attachment 61928
Does anyone remember when my name used to be PopeADope?
This is a debate. Please debate something I said. Show me that I am wrong, mistaken, and that some Protestants know their Bible better than I do.
Dear Spiderman,
You make a sweeping statement and that is very often a dangerous position to take.
The name Martin Luther should ring a bell.
He would be unknown if it were not for Scripture – more so, his knowledge of Scripture. Scripture gave him the knowledge to come to faith in God, to do what he did and that propelled him into the spotlight.
The point is this, Bible knowledge could be priceless or worthless. If knowledge does not lead to faith and trust in God, it is worthless.
And, when God came to earth in the Person of Jesus Christ, He became the embodiment of knowledge: “. . . Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col 2:2-3).
The knowledge some people possess could make them boastful. “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (1 Cor 8:1). The pursuit of knowledge for the sake of knowledge, without faith in God, is foolishness.
Faithful knowledge also implies a relationship. Jesus used the word know to refer to His saving relationship with those who believe in Him: “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me” (John 10:14).
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe if we are not continually trying to get things right, we will remain stuck in false ways.
paradox
(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
What you're basically saying is that revelation has been fulfilled right?
If yes, you're supposed to be able to explain entire revelation (not just one verse or chapter).
I'll be reasonable and not ask too much, therefore if you still hold your position then please explain Revelation 5:2-3
Five Solas
Active Member
It might be more appropriate to refer to the Roman church - or the church of Rome.
The true church, consisting of all who believe (with living faith), had always been 'catholic' meaning the church is one, undivided Christian church with historical continuity from when the first church started.
To say someone is Catholic is actually a misnomer. The true church (the community of faithful believers) is catholic, a person is not catholic.
Church membership does not equate to salvation. Membership in the Roman Catholic church (or any other denomination) is not a passport to heaven - salvation is by faith alone. In other words, only those declared righteous by God because of their faith are part of the one and only church.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
So, just to be clear, are you claiming that the Church established by Jesus and the Twelve was not an organization?
Five Solas
Active Member
Not a human organization, no. But it can be organised. If you mean denominations - that is something that became necessary after the Reformation. Before the Reformation, there was only the church (well actually two if we include the Eastern Orthodox Church).
The global church - the true church - is not visible but it becomes visible locally where the true believers meet.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
OK, so Jesus appointed the Twelve who in turn appointed others with the "mark" of the Church being as such, but yet you claim it wasn't an "organization"? Are you really sure you want to go with that as it certainly appears to be the characteristics of an organization to me?
Five Solas
Active Member
According to the Bible, the church is the body of Christ—all those who believe in Jesus Christ for salvation ( John 3:16 or 1 Cor 12:13).
So, it consists of people with a certain characteristic, i.e. people who believe in God, whether they are organized or not. The fact that we gather or do certain things does not make it church.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
And I agree with that, but that's not what my point was.
Five Solas
Active Member
I stay away from the phrase, organization, at all costs. Community will be closer
paradox
(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
The writers also did not have physical church buildings, nor dress code nor a hole host of things which are normal today and not an issue.
Therefore there is no point to go to church or to be part of communion because there was no such thing during Jesus' time.
From my understanding, you don't "pray" rosary, praying rosary is not strictly speaking a prayer to God, but rather the way of the Cross, recalling Jesus' suffering.
One may as well imagine how it was for Jesus step by step and then pray on each step and have the same result, would you consider this wrong?
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
Matthew 6:7 says that people should not use vain repetitions in prayer. So why would someone repeat the same thing 10 or 20 or 30 times? Our Father, Our Father, Our Father, over and over. I actually think God gets tired of hearing this same words over and over just like people get tired of hearing the same song over and over. Just think if you had to listen to something all day long. Prayer should be talking to your father, not just blindly repeating something. I think God starts to ignore it after a while. So, yes, I consider repetition wrong because the Bible says it is something we should not do. And I know Catholics like to take Bible verses and pretend they say something different from what they say. So what does it mean when it says do not use repetitions in prayer?
paradox
(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
rosary dates back to year 1221 as is part of Christian tradition.
Traditions are not inventions, traditions exist since early Christians.
The bible nowhere says bible only, tradition in all it's flavors is work of the holly spirit, not "invention".
Five Solas
Active Member
Spiderman,
#It is true, Catholics are notorious for not knowing Scripture well.#
I agree
#But having spent time at monasteries, where you go to daily Mass, and hear more Scripture read to you over a period of 6 months than attending Protestant services for years,#
That is not true. Have you ever been to a Sunday service in a Protestant church??
In Reformed churches there is at least one reading from Scripture followed by a sermon.
Many of us do regular Bible studies where we study Scripture. We encourage daily personal Bible reading.
#and getting to know Catholics who actually know their Bible, it is remarkable.#
I know a few Roman Catholics well enough to know that they do not really care and seldom go to Mass.
#A catholic who knows their Bible can easily defeat a Protestant in a debate!#
This statement makes no sense.
#In fact, I have seen Protestants who knew their Bible really well, it lead them into the Catholic Church, and then they debate with a Protestant on EWTN, and they win the debate so easily, it looked like Muhammad Ali in the ring with a poodle (total and complete victory for the Catholic),#
Who is that? I regard this as an unfounded argument.
#because the entire basis for the Protestants argument, the foundation, was completely unbiblical!#
What is the ‘basis’ you refer to? What do you regard as the ‘basis’ of the Reformation or the original Protestants?
I think it is still – after all these years – very hard for a Catholic to grasp the essence of the Reformation because the essence of Roman Catholicism did not change. The RCC is still misleading its members. Like the Pharisees, the RCC is still a church based on human deeds for salvation.
In Reformed Churches the most critical question is this: Is God the acting subject?
Reformed churches believe in a living, acting, intervening God. It is not a matter of reason or deeds but of faith. One cannot earn salvation and can’t be argued into belief in a God who directs the course of the universe; one has faith or nothing.
So, the central teachings of the Reformation are that the Bible is the source of religious authority and that salvation is reached through faith and not the intellect or deeds.
Therefore, salvation is by faith alone. This is firmly based on Scripture which is the ultimate authority - not of the Church and not the Pope.
#Here is why: Protestantism is is actually a system of Religion that is built on a foundation that blows up on it's own. Protestantism is based off of Sola scriptura Doctrine that is found no where in Scripture. Many Protestants often say, "we only follow the Bible". But they have no basis for doing so. The Bible doesn't say to do that!#
You do not know what happened during the Reformation and clearly know very little about Reformed theology.
Firstly, sola scriptura meant Scripture was is the supreme authority over the church - not that Scripture is the only authority. This is/was an issue because your bishops and Pope (“magisterium”) as interpreters of Scripture placed their teaching authority over Scripture itself. The magisterium then could not/cannot be questioned.
Secondly: sola scriptura implies the sufficiency of Scripture. Scripture does not need supplementation of various rituals etc. Scripture equips believers with all that is needed to be saved. It says, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30–31, NIV)
That is very clear, isn’t it?
Thirdly: sola scriptura points to the clarity of Scripture. This did not mean that all of Scripture is crystal clear to all. We strongly believe in preachers and teachers (Eph. 4:11-12). It means that any person could read and study Scripture and come to salvation – i.e. faith in God.
Fact remains, Scripture is essentially for everyone. Scripture was, in William Tyndale’s words, even for the “ploughboy”.
#In fact, Scripture says the opposite. Scripture makes it very clear that people need an official interpreter of Scripture, and that people twist Scripture to their own destruction. #
No, that is a false statement. Scripture does not say the opposite of what the Reformers found in Scripture itself.
Yes, some people indeed twist Scripture to their own destruction. I think you come very close to that. I accuse the RCC of that.
#Matthew 18 "tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." So, the Bible says nothing about using the Bible as the final authority on anything. The Bible actually makes it clear that to do so is dangerous and destructive. The Bible says to listen to and obey the Church.#
#The first Christians were not Bible Christians! That is clearly obvious! The Bible is a Catholic book that was not available to anyone until the Catholic Church councils at Rome, Carthage, and Hippo.#
This makes no sense. Goodness, gracious! The first Christians had the ‘Bible’ in its most basic form – they had the Apostles – the testimony of the original witnesses. They only started to write the Gospels down roughly when the apostles died. Paul’s letters were sent to the individual churches anyway. They were more fortunate than us - they could question the apostles. I would have loved that.
And, they had the Scriptures – the books of the Old Testament which were wholly authoritative then and which are still wholly authoritative in all Reformed Churches.
Stop the boasting.
#Every Christian Church on the face of the earth had devotion to Mary and the Saints for over 1500 years, and to me I tend to believe that if Christ is a man of his word, he would shepherd his Church better than that, if such practices were an abomination.#
What?
#Most Protestants deny that Mary is "Mother of God",#
Really??
#stating that every Christian Church on earth was mistaken , and was Idolatrous, and most Protestants believe veneration of Mary and Saints is Demonic.#
Sweeping statements like this destroy your credibility.
#It is true, Catholics are notorious for not knowing Scripture well.#
I agree
#But having spent time at monasteries, where you go to daily Mass, and hear more Scripture read to you over a period of 6 months than attending Protestant services for years,#
That is not true. Have you ever been to a Sunday service in a Protestant church??
In Reformed churches there is at least one reading from Scripture followed by a sermon.
Many of us do regular Bible studies where we study Scripture. We encourage daily personal Bible reading.
#and getting to know Catholics who actually know their Bible, it is remarkable.#
I know a few Roman Catholics well enough to know that they do not really care and seldom go to Mass.
#A catholic who knows their Bible can easily defeat a Protestant in a debate!#
This statement makes no sense.
#In fact, I have seen Protestants who knew their Bible really well, it lead them into the Catholic Church, and then they debate with a Protestant on EWTN, and they win the debate so easily, it looked like Muhammad Ali in the ring with a poodle (total and complete victory for the Catholic),#
Who is that? I regard this as an unfounded argument.
#because the entire basis for the Protestants argument, the foundation, was completely unbiblical!#
What is the ‘basis’ you refer to? What do you regard as the ‘basis’ of the Reformation or the original Protestants?
I think it is still – after all these years – very hard for a Catholic to grasp the essence of the Reformation because the essence of Roman Catholicism did not change. The RCC is still misleading its members. Like the Pharisees, the RCC is still a church based on human deeds for salvation.
In Reformed Churches the most critical question is this: Is God the acting subject?
Reformed churches believe in a living, acting, intervening God. It is not a matter of reason or deeds but of faith. One cannot earn salvation and can’t be argued into belief in a God who directs the course of the universe; one has faith or nothing.
So, the central teachings of the Reformation are that the Bible is the source of religious authority and that salvation is reached through faith and not the intellect or deeds.
Therefore, salvation is by faith alone. This is firmly based on Scripture which is the ultimate authority - not of the Church and not the Pope.
#Here is why: Protestantism is is actually a system of Religion that is built on a foundation that blows up on it's own. Protestantism is based off of Sola scriptura Doctrine that is found no where in Scripture. Many Protestants often say, "we only follow the Bible". But they have no basis for doing so. The Bible doesn't say to do that!#
You do not know what happened during the Reformation and clearly know very little about Reformed theology.
Firstly, sola scriptura meant Scripture was is the supreme authority over the church - not that Scripture is the only authority. This is/was an issue because your bishops and Pope (“magisterium”) as interpreters of Scripture placed their teaching authority over Scripture itself. The magisterium then could not/cannot be questioned.
Secondly: sola scriptura implies the sufficiency of Scripture. Scripture does not need supplementation of various rituals etc. Scripture equips believers with all that is needed to be saved. It says, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30–31, NIV)
That is very clear, isn’t it?
Thirdly: sola scriptura points to the clarity of Scripture. This did not mean that all of Scripture is crystal clear to all. We strongly believe in preachers and teachers (Eph. 4:11-12). It means that any person could read and study Scripture and come to salvation – i.e. faith in God.
Fact remains, Scripture is essentially for everyone. Scripture was, in William Tyndale’s words, even for the “ploughboy”.
#In fact, Scripture says the opposite. Scripture makes it very clear that people need an official interpreter of Scripture, and that people twist Scripture to their own destruction. #
No, that is a false statement. Scripture does not say the opposite of what the Reformers found in Scripture itself.
Yes, some people indeed twist Scripture to their own destruction. I think you come very close to that. I accuse the RCC of that.
#Matthew 18 "tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." So, the Bible says nothing about using the Bible as the final authority on anything. The Bible actually makes it clear that to do so is dangerous and destructive. The Bible says to listen to and obey the Church.#
#The first Christians were not Bible Christians! That is clearly obvious! The Bible is a Catholic book that was not available to anyone until the Catholic Church councils at Rome, Carthage, and Hippo.#
This makes no sense. Goodness, gracious! The first Christians had the ‘Bible’ in its most basic form – they had the Apostles – the testimony of the original witnesses. They only started to write the Gospels down roughly when the apostles died. Paul’s letters were sent to the individual churches anyway. They were more fortunate than us - they could question the apostles. I would have loved that.
And, they had the Scriptures – the books of the Old Testament which were wholly authoritative then and which are still wholly authoritative in all Reformed Churches.
Stop the boasting.
#Every Christian Church on the face of the earth had devotion to Mary and the Saints for over 1500 years, and to me I tend to believe that if Christ is a man of his word, he would shepherd his Church better than that, if such practices were an abomination.#
What?
#Most Protestants deny that Mary is "Mother of God",#
Really??
#stating that every Christian Church on earth was mistaken , and was Idolatrous, and most Protestants believe veneration of Mary and Saints is Demonic.#
Sweeping statements like this destroy your credibility.
Five Solas
Active Member
#That is thoroughly depressing and nauseating (in my opinion), because when I try to look at history that way, I see God look evil, pathetic, a thoroughly terrible Father in my opinion, a thoroughly terrible shepherd, and a liar who can't be trusted, because he abandoned Christians, and let all Churches on earth (for over 1500 years) fall into demonic practice. #
This is an emotional outpour. I do not say demonic, but the state of the RCC at the time of the Reformation was pretty dire and its essence did not change to this day. God never abandoned His children but people can certainly abandon God. The RCC certainly abandoned the essence of the biblical message as I have shown above.
#Nothing against Protestants, because I'm sure many Protestants are more holy, better people than myself.#
What? This whole post of yours is about how stupid, ignorant and wrong ‘Protestants’ are.
#But when I try to see history from that point of view, that all churches on earth were sanctioning prayers to demons + Satanic abominations, I simply find it incompatible with a loving responsible God, who is faithful to his word.#
Please do not confuse God’s faithfulness with the RC Church – it is not the same thing. The RCC is not faithful to Scripture. The RCC is not God either.
#Jesus had a biological earthly mother at the nativity, one mother who nursed, breastfed God, one mother who gave birth to God, one mother the Angel said "Hail full of grace, rejoice highly favored one". Scripture calls Mary "The Mother of my Lord" google "who am I that the mother of my Lord should visit me", Scripture says "all generations shall call Mary blessed", the hail Mary is a Biblical prayer.#
So?
It is all the manmade traditions the RCC added to the biblical figure of Mary that the Reformers objected to.
#Scripture says "the word was God...the word became flesh and dwelt among us", Jesus is God.#
All Reformed churches believe that Jesus is God and you should know that.
You should also be aware that all Reformed churches adhere to the three historic creeds as biblically-faithful statements of Christian orthodoxy i.e. The Apostles, Nicene, and Chalcedonian Creeds. "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father."
Now, stop the false accusations.
#Protestants sometimes teach erroneous Doctrines that seem to deny the Divinity of Christ, which the Bible says otherwise.#
That is not true. No Reformed church denies the divinity of Christ. I know that theologians like John Shelby Spong do but he is not Reformed – he is/was Episcopal (the lot who tries to be more Catholic than the RCC itself). The line between theological liberalism and atheism is paper-thin and the modern RCC theology is becoming increasingly liberal. So, be concerned about the theology in your own church (and that of your liberal Pope) and stop pointing fingers.
#Mary was at the foot of the cross with Christ. Jesus told John, "son behold thy mother."#
So?
#Scripture says in revelation, a sign in the sky, a woman standing on the Moon, clothed with the Sun, on her head a crown of stars. Scripture says the woman is the mother of those who follow God's commandments. She battles the Dragon. Revelation 12. The Mother of God.#
So?
#Many people claim to be a friend of Christ, yet they genuinely despise his bride, the Church!#
Mostly atheists, perhaps. Definitely not Reformed Christians.
#I have difficult time trusting such people. It would seem those who cause division and confusion, are teaching dangerous Doctrines (according to the Gospel) that were not part of Christianity for over 1500 years , and divide and confuse Christians. Just what Satan would want (assuming he exists), divide the flock so he can conquer.#
Division inside the church had never been a good thing. Neither is false teaching and idolatry. 1 CORINTHIANS 10:14: “Therefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.” The Reformers did just that.
Be assured, that the one and only catholic church is still existing. It is still the body/bride of Christ but it is not the RCC as such. The true Christian church consists of all believers worldwide – those with a life-giving faith in Jesus Christ, their Lord and Saviour. Mary is the Mother of Christ but salvation is from Christ – not Mary. Praying to Mary is idolatry.
The Reformed evaluation of the RCC view of Mary is this:
“In the Roman Catholic Catechism prayer to Mary is explained in part 4, chapter 2, article 2. The Catechism talks about the “twofold movement of prayer to Mary” which 1) consists of magnifying the Lord for what he did through her and 2) “entrusts the supplications and praises of the children of God to the Mother of Jesus.” This twofold movement is found in the Ave Maria (Hail Mary), the traditional Catholic prayer which addresses Mary, who is “full of grace.” The Catechism also calls her “the dwelling of God…with men,” and ascribes to her these names: “the Mother of Mercy, the All-Holy One.”
Because Mary is at the top of the human ladder of blessedness, the Catechism also says we can “entrust all our cares and petitions to her: she prays for us as she prayed for herself…we give ourselves over to her now…to surrender ‘the hour of our death’ wholly to her care.” In fact, Rome says, “We can pray with and to her. The prayer of the Church is sustained by the prayer of Mary and united with it in hope.”
This is one of the major reasons why the Reformation happened: because Rome was steeped in corrupt, idolatrous worship. And this is why the Reformation matters today, because Rome has not repented of her idolatry; the above quotes are from the Roman Catholic Church’s modern Catechism.”
And be assured, Satan is real.
#are teaching dangerous Doctrines (according to the Gospel) that were not part of Christianity for over 1500 years#
Here you go again - What dangerous doctrines?
This is an emotional outpour. I do not say demonic, but the state of the RCC at the time of the Reformation was pretty dire and its essence did not change to this day. God never abandoned His children but people can certainly abandon God. The RCC certainly abandoned the essence of the biblical message as I have shown above.
#Nothing against Protestants, because I'm sure many Protestants are more holy, better people than myself.#
What? This whole post of yours is about how stupid, ignorant and wrong ‘Protestants’ are.
#But when I try to see history from that point of view, that all churches on earth were sanctioning prayers to demons + Satanic abominations, I simply find it incompatible with a loving responsible God, who is faithful to his word.#
Please do not confuse God’s faithfulness with the RC Church – it is not the same thing. The RCC is not faithful to Scripture. The RCC is not God either.
#Jesus had a biological earthly mother at the nativity, one mother who nursed, breastfed God, one mother who gave birth to God, one mother the Angel said "Hail full of grace, rejoice highly favored one". Scripture calls Mary "The Mother of my Lord" google "who am I that the mother of my Lord should visit me", Scripture says "all generations shall call Mary blessed", the hail Mary is a Biblical prayer.#
So?
It is all the manmade traditions the RCC added to the biblical figure of Mary that the Reformers objected to.
#Scripture says "the word was God...the word became flesh and dwelt among us", Jesus is God.#
All Reformed churches believe that Jesus is God and you should know that.
You should also be aware that all Reformed churches adhere to the three historic creeds as biblically-faithful statements of Christian orthodoxy i.e. The Apostles, Nicene, and Chalcedonian Creeds. "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father."
Now, stop the false accusations.
#Protestants sometimes teach erroneous Doctrines that seem to deny the Divinity of Christ, which the Bible says otherwise.#
That is not true. No Reformed church denies the divinity of Christ. I know that theologians like John Shelby Spong do but he is not Reformed – he is/was Episcopal (the lot who tries to be more Catholic than the RCC itself). The line between theological liberalism and atheism is paper-thin and the modern RCC theology is becoming increasingly liberal. So, be concerned about the theology in your own church (and that of your liberal Pope) and stop pointing fingers.
#Mary was at the foot of the cross with Christ. Jesus told John, "son behold thy mother."#
So?
#Scripture says in revelation, a sign in the sky, a woman standing on the Moon, clothed with the Sun, on her head a crown of stars. Scripture says the woman is the mother of those who follow God's commandments. She battles the Dragon. Revelation 12. The Mother of God.#
So?
#Many people claim to be a friend of Christ, yet they genuinely despise his bride, the Church!#
Mostly atheists, perhaps. Definitely not Reformed Christians.
#I have difficult time trusting such people. It would seem those who cause division and confusion, are teaching dangerous Doctrines (according to the Gospel) that were not part of Christianity for over 1500 years , and divide and confuse Christians. Just what Satan would want (assuming he exists), divide the flock so he can conquer.#
Division inside the church had never been a good thing. Neither is false teaching and idolatry. 1 CORINTHIANS 10:14: “Therefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.” The Reformers did just that.
Be assured, that the one and only catholic church is still existing. It is still the body/bride of Christ but it is not the RCC as such. The true Christian church consists of all believers worldwide – those with a life-giving faith in Jesus Christ, their Lord and Saviour. Mary is the Mother of Christ but salvation is from Christ – not Mary. Praying to Mary is idolatry.
The Reformed evaluation of the RCC view of Mary is this:
“In the Roman Catholic Catechism prayer to Mary is explained in part 4, chapter 2, article 2. The Catechism talks about the “twofold movement of prayer to Mary” which 1) consists of magnifying the Lord for what he did through her and 2) “entrusts the supplications and praises of the children of God to the Mother of Jesus.” This twofold movement is found in the Ave Maria (Hail Mary), the traditional Catholic prayer which addresses Mary, who is “full of grace.” The Catechism also calls her “the dwelling of God…with men,” and ascribes to her these names: “the Mother of Mercy, the All-Holy One.”
Because Mary is at the top of the human ladder of blessedness, the Catechism also says we can “entrust all our cares and petitions to her: she prays for us as she prayed for herself…we give ourselves over to her now…to surrender ‘the hour of our death’ wholly to her care.” In fact, Rome says, “We can pray with and to her. The prayer of the Church is sustained by the prayer of Mary and united with it in hope.”
This is one of the major reasons why the Reformation happened: because Rome was steeped in corrupt, idolatrous worship. And this is why the Reformation matters today, because Rome has not repented of her idolatry; the above quotes are from the Roman Catholic Church’s modern Catechism.”
And be assured, Satan is real.
#are teaching dangerous Doctrines (according to the Gospel) that were not part of Christianity for over 1500 years#
Here you go again - What dangerous doctrines?
Five Solas
Active Member
#Jesus promised he built his Church on Peter, first Bishop of Rome (Pope) and the promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against her. Some people make Jesus look like the most incompetent shepherd there ever was, waiting over 1500 years to build a Church that wasn't a Satanic abomination. #
Do you deny that we can err or hold false teachings?
You are very dramatic but yes, we must combat heresy i.e., false teachings. The Bible is full of it.
In the Gospels, Jesus warns against false teachers, speaks of wolves in sheep’s clothing and the “leaven of the Pharisees.” His ministry is one of conflict with those who refused to accept these teachings.
Acts contains the record of the church’s first major controversy over whether or not a person must become a Jew before he could qualify as a Christian. A church council in Jerusalem was called to settle the matter.
Romans is an entire doctrinal treatise about justification by faith alone in contrast to salvation by works. Does the RCC ever teach from this epistle?
I Corinthians is loaded with schisms, misuse of gifts, church discipline, marriage, and divorce, etc.
II Corinthians takes on false apostles who had invaded the church.
Galatians also defends Justification by faith alone – RCC take note.
Philippians deals with a split in that church.
Colossians is consumed with fighting Judaistic Gnosticism.
I & II Thessalonians take up false teaching about the Lord’s coming and eschatology etc.
#Furthermore, what I have seen from following the Bible alone Doctrine, is a confusing mess (in my opinion), with no unity, and easily the worst affliction to ever strike Christianity! To divide and conquer , would be the strategy of the Devil, and there is much evidence to suggest that nothing has done more to confuse and divide the flock than the UNBIBLICAL Sola Scriptura Doctrine that Protestantism was founded on.#
The great division among churches is indeed tragic. But, first of all, I blame the RCC. If it remained a pure and true church it would never have happened.
But as I have shown – false beliefs plagued the church from very early on and Satan never stopped to rest. The RCC is only one of many churches with false teachings.
I stand corrected, but I believe the theology of the original Reformers is the purest theology available to us. I regard myself as orthodox reformed and I feel comfortable with the theology and interpretations of that period. The true, universal church was very visible then.
I believe that all true believers are inside His church wherever they are and in whatever denomination they might be. Jesus knows His sheep. He knows who they are and where they are although we might not see them. He will be the judge. So, to us, it might look like a mess but Jesus oversees His flock. That gives me comfort.
#Some protestants also refer to the Catholic Church as "Prostitute, Whore of Babylon, Religion of the Antichrist"! This is extremely judgmental and sometimes becomes very hateful, condemning over a billion Christians as being hell bound followers of Satan and the Antichrist's whore of Babylon. When I try to see things through that lense, I get very depressed, and feel terrible about God.#
It is positive that this concerns you. Read a book about Luther’s spiritual journey. That might help you discover the essence of salvation as he did.
#Some Protestants often deny that Jesus was really present in the Eucharist. Jesus never said the bread and wine was a representation of his body and blood. He said "This is my body, this is my blood". The lamb in the Old Testament had to be eaten. Jesus was the lamb of God who said "unless you eat of the flesh , and drink of the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you". (John 6)#
God is omnipresent. But not in the flesh.
We can have this discussion later.
#It was the first time in Christ's ministry where he lost followers. It was over that teaching. The people who abandoned Christ in John 6 fall into the same error and Heresy as Protestants who deny or attack the Catholic teaching about the Eucharist!#
You are referring to this:
“As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” John 6:66-67 (NASB)
And you imply they left because Jesus said 53 “
Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Your conclusion is wrong because the passage is very clear that they left because they did not believe.
Those who had found Jesus’ words difficult did not understand His message. Jesus explains,
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. John 6:63-64 (NASB)
Is that not clear?
Those who struggled with Jesus’ words were those who did not believe Him.
Jesus said that His words were spiritual words. One needs the Holy Spirit to help him or her understand (1 Corinthians 2:12-14).
Many did not understand Jesus because they did not believe, and many did not believe because God the Father had not chosen them to believe. That is Jesus’ next statement.
And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.” John 6:65 (NASB)
It is clear that they did not believe in Him because God the Father had not granted them permission to respond to His teaching. It is a biblical dogma that God choose some men and women to believe in Jesus.
So, As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” John 6:66-67 (NASB)
Those without faith left – nothing about eating His body or drinking His blood.
#And keep in mind. The people who abandoned Christ over the teaching about the Eucharist and Holy Communion, were not people that Jesus called back. Jesus didn't say "Wait a minute, I didn't mean literally. Please, let me explain. I meant bread and wine that represents me". Neither did Jesus at the last supper say anything about it representing anything, in any of the last supper accounts. It was completely literal words in all accounts, in all Gospels. He never once used words of symbolism!#
Your interpretation does not reflect what Jesus actually said in the actual context. Why do you ignore what Jesus said about faith and election of some?
Those, without faith, who heard Jesus' statements misunderstood his words. They, like you, interpreted the statement in a literal fashion, believing he was crazy for condoning what amounted to cannibalism. Jesus' statements were symbolic of the bread and wine he would introduce to His twelve disciples at His final Passover (Matthew 26:26 - 28). He refused to back down from the truth He was hammering down: “I am the bread of life” That is symbolism. It pointed them to what was coming – to the cross. The substance of that bread is His sacrifice on the cross, the giving of His flesh and blood. What He gave at the cross, we must receive in faith. That is symbolised in the bread and wine.
Look again at verses 60-64: Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?” ……… The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life…… But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe”
It's all about faith…
#Some people who call themselves Christian are being completely unbiblical and are at war with the teachings of Jesus Christ in every Gospel. Some "Bible Christians" are opposed to the word of God! Some protestants are actually opposed to one of the most important teachings of Jesus. Jesus said that those who refuse to embrace that teaching have no life in them, are spiritually bankrupt, are spiritually dead.
I don't agree with Christ, but those were his strong words and a warning to people who push what many protestants are pushing, to cut people off, and alienate them from God and grace!#
Another vague accusation and judgment.
#In the world book encyclopedia, a non-Catholic book, there is an unbreakable chain of Popes dating back to Peter, first Bishop of Rome. The second was Linus in 67 AD. Protestants have no evidence that I know of for valid sacramental priesthood, Bishops, or valid sacrament of ordination. The Catholic Bishops, Pope, and priesthood, can trace itself back to Peter and the Apostles.#
So?
Do you deny that we can err or hold false teachings?
You are very dramatic but yes, we must combat heresy i.e., false teachings. The Bible is full of it.
In the Gospels, Jesus warns against false teachers, speaks of wolves in sheep’s clothing and the “leaven of the Pharisees.” His ministry is one of conflict with those who refused to accept these teachings.
Acts contains the record of the church’s first major controversy over whether or not a person must become a Jew before he could qualify as a Christian. A church council in Jerusalem was called to settle the matter.
Romans is an entire doctrinal treatise about justification by faith alone in contrast to salvation by works. Does the RCC ever teach from this epistle?
I Corinthians is loaded with schisms, misuse of gifts, church discipline, marriage, and divorce, etc.
II Corinthians takes on false apostles who had invaded the church.
Galatians also defends Justification by faith alone – RCC take note.
Philippians deals with a split in that church.
Colossians is consumed with fighting Judaistic Gnosticism.
I & II Thessalonians take up false teaching about the Lord’s coming and eschatology etc.
#Furthermore, what I have seen from following the Bible alone Doctrine, is a confusing mess (in my opinion), with no unity, and easily the worst affliction to ever strike Christianity! To divide and conquer , would be the strategy of the Devil, and there is much evidence to suggest that nothing has done more to confuse and divide the flock than the UNBIBLICAL Sola Scriptura Doctrine that Protestantism was founded on.#
The great division among churches is indeed tragic. But, first of all, I blame the RCC. If it remained a pure and true church it would never have happened.
But as I have shown – false beliefs plagued the church from very early on and Satan never stopped to rest. The RCC is only one of many churches with false teachings.
I stand corrected, but I believe the theology of the original Reformers is the purest theology available to us. I regard myself as orthodox reformed and I feel comfortable with the theology and interpretations of that period. The true, universal church was very visible then.
I believe that all true believers are inside His church wherever they are and in whatever denomination they might be. Jesus knows His sheep. He knows who they are and where they are although we might not see them. He will be the judge. So, to us, it might look like a mess but Jesus oversees His flock. That gives me comfort.
#Some protestants also refer to the Catholic Church as "Prostitute, Whore of Babylon, Religion of the Antichrist"! This is extremely judgmental and sometimes becomes very hateful, condemning over a billion Christians as being hell bound followers of Satan and the Antichrist's whore of Babylon. When I try to see things through that lense, I get very depressed, and feel terrible about God.#
It is positive that this concerns you. Read a book about Luther’s spiritual journey. That might help you discover the essence of salvation as he did.
#Some Protestants often deny that Jesus was really present in the Eucharist. Jesus never said the bread and wine was a representation of his body and blood. He said "This is my body, this is my blood". The lamb in the Old Testament had to be eaten. Jesus was the lamb of God who said "unless you eat of the flesh , and drink of the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you". (John 6)#
God is omnipresent. But not in the flesh.
We can have this discussion later.
#It was the first time in Christ's ministry where he lost followers. It was over that teaching. The people who abandoned Christ in John 6 fall into the same error and Heresy as Protestants who deny or attack the Catholic teaching about the Eucharist!#
You are referring to this:
“As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” John 6:66-67 (NASB)
And you imply they left because Jesus said 53 “
Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Your conclusion is wrong because the passage is very clear that they left because they did not believe.
Those who had found Jesus’ words difficult did not understand His message. Jesus explains,
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. John 6:63-64 (NASB)
Is that not clear?
Those who struggled with Jesus’ words were those who did not believe Him.
Jesus said that His words were spiritual words. One needs the Holy Spirit to help him or her understand (1 Corinthians 2:12-14).
Many did not understand Jesus because they did not believe, and many did not believe because God the Father had not chosen them to believe. That is Jesus’ next statement.
And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.” John 6:65 (NASB)
It is clear that they did not believe in Him because God the Father had not granted them permission to respond to His teaching. It is a biblical dogma that God choose some men and women to believe in Jesus.
So, As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” John 6:66-67 (NASB)
Those without faith left – nothing about eating His body or drinking His blood.
#And keep in mind. The people who abandoned Christ over the teaching about the Eucharist and Holy Communion, were not people that Jesus called back. Jesus didn't say "Wait a minute, I didn't mean literally. Please, let me explain. I meant bread and wine that represents me". Neither did Jesus at the last supper say anything about it representing anything, in any of the last supper accounts. It was completely literal words in all accounts, in all Gospels. He never once used words of symbolism!#
Your interpretation does not reflect what Jesus actually said in the actual context. Why do you ignore what Jesus said about faith and election of some?
Those, without faith, who heard Jesus' statements misunderstood his words. They, like you, interpreted the statement in a literal fashion, believing he was crazy for condoning what amounted to cannibalism. Jesus' statements were symbolic of the bread and wine he would introduce to His twelve disciples at His final Passover (Matthew 26:26 - 28). He refused to back down from the truth He was hammering down: “I am the bread of life” That is symbolism. It pointed them to what was coming – to the cross. The substance of that bread is His sacrifice on the cross, the giving of His flesh and blood. What He gave at the cross, we must receive in faith. That is symbolised in the bread and wine.
Look again at verses 60-64: Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?” ……… The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life…… But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe”
It's all about faith…
#Some people who call themselves Christian are being completely unbiblical and are at war with the teachings of Jesus Christ in every Gospel. Some "Bible Christians" are opposed to the word of God! Some protestants are actually opposed to one of the most important teachings of Jesus. Jesus said that those who refuse to embrace that teaching have no life in them, are spiritually bankrupt, are spiritually dead.
I don't agree with Christ, but those were his strong words and a warning to people who push what many protestants are pushing, to cut people off, and alienate them from God and grace!#
Another vague accusation and judgment.
#In the world book encyclopedia, a non-Catholic book, there is an unbreakable chain of Popes dating back to Peter, first Bishop of Rome. The second was Linus in 67 AD. Protestants have no evidence that I know of for valid sacramental priesthood, Bishops, or valid sacrament of ordination. The Catholic Bishops, Pope, and priesthood, can trace itself back to Peter and the Apostles.#
So?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Obviously, "community" is fine, but still was a community with appointed leaders going back to Jesus and the Twelve. IOW, it was very much "organized".