Church cuts ties with US over gay bishop

SAPA-AFP via Independent Online (SA) ^ | November 22 2003

[Veritas_est]

Once again, elitism pure and simple. You don't look in history to find a Christian. You look in the Word of God. I am a Christian according to the Word of God. Only you and God, through his Word can speak to whether you are a Christian or not. It has nothing to do with the organization you belong to.

[stands2reason]

In other words, if you think what you believe is Christian, find historic proof that your belief has in fact, been a very long held belief.

Stupid me. I thought you just had to follow the Bible.

[EGPWS]

The world's goal is to be politically correct and not to offend anyone. The truth in God's Word is highly offensive to many because it lays out clearly what is right and what is wrong, and those living in rebellion to God are then reminded that the free will choices they have made are not in God's will. I guess my question for you today is, are you more concerned with pleasing the world, or pleasing God?????

well said, and sadly enough, you have said words worth contemplation to most.

It's enough to make one go postal at times! ; )

[stands2reason]

Only you and God, through his Word can speak to whether you are a Christian or not.

Please. The Bible obviously means nothing. It's all about your Church history. Certainly you remember when Jesus said, "No one comes to the Father except through apostolic lineage."

[1stFreedom]

Funny, the apostles wouldn't have bought up your challenge.

Ya really have to remember there wasn't any written scripture at the time. (Remember Judas was replaced by THE APOSTLES -- an example of apostolic succession).

Even so, there is plenty of evidence in Scripture supporing the historical Christian view of apostlic succession.

And no historic Christian would accept your argument or Challenge.

[Veritas_est]

I think you've been reading 1stFreedom's bible. (That small b is no accident.)

[Sloth]

Certainly you remember when Jesus said, "No one comes to the Father except through apostolic lineage."

LOL... also, where James said "Faith without apostolic lineage is dead."

[1stFreedom]

>>Stupid me.

No, uninformed you. Read history to get an eyewitness to what the Christinaity *really* is. It isn't protestantism and definetly not "sola scriptura" based.

>>I thought you just had to follow the Bible.

That's not scriptural. You MUST follow the Bible, but not JUST follow the bible.

[Cicero]

Your bigotry is showing.

There's a distinct difference between having some sinful bishops, which will be the case in any church, and deliberately ordaining a man living in sin--not only actively living with a homosexual but dumping his wife and children.

Yes, Rembert Weakland was a pathetic excuse for a bishop, and there have been others. But Weakland's Church didn't openly consecrate him as a bishop BECAUSE he was a flagrant homosexual who boasted about dumping his wife and kids and living with a male partner, and on top of that claim that their action made their Church better.

[1stFreedom]

You look at history to PROVE what Christian belief actually is. It's a historical account of Christianity.

And the Organization I belong to you depend on in the fact that your relgion has no understand of Scripture outside of what Historic Christianity has called "Scripture"

[stands2reason]

Even so, there is plenty of evidence in Scripture supporing the historical Christian view of apostlic succession.

I only asked for one. You have to be the most unchristianlike "Christian" I've ever come across. And if people that think like you are the only "true Christians", well then, Christianity doesn't exist.

[Servant of the 9]

Your bigotry is showing.

No, my cynicism about all professional 'Religious'

So9

[stands2reason]

It's not scriptural to only follow the Bible? Okaaaaay.

I take it John 3:16 is a total lie, then.


I've never been so glad to not be a Christian in my life.

[Veritas_est]

It is clear that think you have the right and authority to set the rules for debate here. However, history will have absolutely nothing to do with determining a person's Christianity. It will only be their relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ which will be the determining factor.

[stands2reason]

You guys seem to be quiet on 1st Freedom's bigotry. Do you agree with him?

[jocon307]

"If that's your attitude, don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out!"

How gracious! May I get you some more stones?

[sweetliberty]

"I never knew that some Catholics consider themselves the only "true Christians" till I came to FR...."

Me either, although I had heard there were some. I have worked in various ministries over the years with a great many Catholics, and the vast majority of them are Bible belieiving, praying, spiritual people; committed brothers and sisters in Christ and with whom any doctrinal conflicts were about as significant as having different addresses.

[freedumb2003]

In terms of Christianity, apostolic lineage is no small matter

It depends on whether you are talking about the structure of religion or the meaning behind it.

Most mongrel religions (Episcopal and Morman being the foremost examples) were created for reasons other than the love of Christ. But the descendents of the early saps certainly have read the Bible and are true adherents to the tenents of the teachings of Christ. Modern Christianity requests no more but also no less.

[Graybeard58]

bttt

[autoresponder]