Where Have All the Protestants Gone?

NOR ^ | January 2006 | Thomas Storck

[Cronos]

Paul started preaching on his own. He didn't wait years.

Of course -- he learnt MORE about God through interaction with the other Apostles, correct?

You are brainwashed to think that you couldn't read and understand the Bible on your own when you very well could if you were born again.

Ok, you understand the Bible, take the phrase "Women should submit to their husbands" -- what does that mean according to you?

[Cronos]

So why is it that the RC Church takes credit for canonizing the Scriptures?

The APOSTOLIC Church takes credit for this. The Church picked out which books were scriptural in the NT. They rejected the Gospel of Thomas. Do YOU then accept the Gospel of Thomas?

[magisterium]

Where do you find Scriptural evidence that Jesus' "brothers" (actually His cousins, but I'll humor you. It's too late at night for a massive refutation of that idea right now) were non-believers at the time of His death? There is none. Cousins or brothers, there is not one shred of evidence that they were unbelievers. According to you guys, at least two of them were Apostles! The Apostles were to have all doubts removed three days later in the upper room, no? So what would have been the big problem?

If He had brothers, Jesus would have defied MASSIVE Jewish tradition against not favoring the eldest son in all things pertaining to inheritance. With Jesus dead, according to your theory, some OTHER man was now the eldest. He would HAVE to care for Mary in this circumstance.

Since this didn't happen, and her care was entrusted to someone we KNOW wasn't His literal brother (John was the son of Zebedee), there is compelling evidence that Jesus had no blood-brothers.

Besides that, we have the testimony of the early Church, which unanimously understood the situation in an identical fashion to modern Catholicism. You would discount testimony from those early days, even when that testimony starts within the lifetimes of those whose lives overlapped the Apostles themselves! Yet, somehow, it is the Catholic Church which is "ignorant" in this matter...

[Cronos]

The Bible says that husband and wife do not withhold sex from one another except for prayer and fasting.

1 Corinthians 7:4  The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

5  Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Neither of those statements say that a wife sins by not sleeping with her husband, except by your inference, your personal, individual, flawed, interpretation.  In fact neither statement even talks about sex...

[Conservative til I die]

Also, did God tell you that He is odds with evolution. God hates liars. I'd call that at odds with evolution and evolutionist.

This is not logical. First of all, the concept of "evolution" cannot be a liar. It can be a lie, but not a liar.

Those that ascribe to evolution are liars?

Mind you, I'm not an evolutionist myself, but just arguing the case here.

[Cronos]

If you look at the history of ecumenical councils, you will find that such is usually the case - dogmatic assertions about such-and-such are not made until there is a controversy anout such-and-such, and the correct teaching must be publicly promulgated. Case in point: the Trinity was defined at Nicaea in 325 NOT because it was all of a sudden dreamed-up then, but because there was enough controversy denying what was *already* taught in the Catholic Church that formal definition of the Trinity was needed to set everyone straight.

Of course many of those who have a knee-jerk reaction to deny The Church will say that Nicaea was wrong -- it was with, Shock, the Emperor Constantine

[gscc]

You obfuscate - there is no disagreement on the historical sequence of the canonization process. What is objectionable is the notion that God is not the author of Scripture and that those that did decide on the canon were anything other than tools in God's hand. The historical record of Moses and the exodus is unquestioned. The process of canonization (apart from arguments over the apocryphal or deutro-canonical books) is historical fact. The objection is the RC Church taking any credit for the final canon - the prerogative of God alone.

[Cronos]

Rather, individual members of the Catholic Church on this forum are oftern obliged to bring the matter up when people palpably ignorant of easily attainable and verifiable history attempt to retroactively rewrite that history (or simply ignore it) to further a disingenuous agenda.

Correct -- especially those who seem to think that Christianity was started in the 16th century.....

[Conservative til I die]

You are brainwashed to think that you couldn't read and understand the Bible on your own when you very well could if you were born again.

Unfortunately, I do not believe that Evangelicals have any greater understanding of the Bible by being born again than any other learned Christian does.

And frankly, I don't think it's the Holy Spirit that is working to make most born agains have the same views.

Judging by the cut-n-paste jobs from anti-Catholic apologetics sites that are constantly produced on FR, it's more like you folks are the brainwashed ones, sucking up the same information from the same cut-n-paste sites.

[Conservative til I die]

The Bible says that husband and wife do not withhold sex from one another except for prayer and fasting. 1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Not to do some trademark Protestant tangent jumping myself, but I've also seen Protestants use the argument that Catholic clerical celibacy is unbiblical because Jewish rabbis (who one could argue the priesthood is modeled after) had to be married. Of course, Jesus Himself was a rabbi and celibate.

[Jaded]

I don't buy the "once saved always saved". I've known some incredibly hateful "Born Again Christians". They say that the Bible gives them license to hate and carve out the snippets of verse to support them.

I have a friend who does alot with the Right To Life organizations. She said that while they were praying across the street from the main abortion mill in Houston a woman brought in her teenage daughter for an abortion. The mother came back out to scream at the protesters that she was saved and God has already forgiven her for getting her daughter's abortion.

Recently a Southern Baptist friend told me that if you lost your salvation by walking away or backsliding that you could never get it back. That I don't believe either.

And yes, I know people who claim to be Catholic but you couldn't tell it.

[Jaded]

They ignored it when I've said it. Good luck.

[Conservative til I die]

Yours is such a "works" based faith. You can be saved, but you can lose that salvation if you don't do the "works" that your church dictates and you still go to purgatory to work off sin after you die.

IMHO, our LORD JESUS CHRIST did not come to sacrifice himself for us to then make it so complicated that a sinner couldn't have the blessed assurance of KNOWING that they are one of the elect and are held in his hand no matter what.

MT 19:16-29
16 Now someone approached him and said, "Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?"
17 He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."
18 He asked him, "Which ones?" And Jesus replied, " 'You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness;
19 honor your father and your mother'; and 'you shall love your neighbor as yourself.'"
20 The young man said to him, "All of these I have observed. What do I still lack?"
21 Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to (the) poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
22 When the young man heard this statement, he went away sad, for he had many possessions.
23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Amen, I say to you, it will be hard for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.
24 Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and said, "Who then can be saved?"
26 Jesus looked at them and said, "For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible."
27 Then Peter said to him in reply, "We have given up everything and followed you. What will there be for us?"
28 Jesus said to them, "Amen, I say to you that you who have followed me, in the new age, when the Son of Man is seated on his throne of glory, will yourselves sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29 And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times more, and will inherit eternal life.

Jesus sure seemed to disagree about faith alone vs. faith/works. Obey the commandments, lose your love of wealth, give charitably to the poor, follow Jesus, build up treasure in Heaven. Jesus makes a pretty interesting illustration about rewarding those who have given up family for His sake "a hundred times more".

You might also take heed of the last verse of this chapter in your presumptiveness: "But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first."

[Conservative til I die]

I have a friend who does alot with the Right To Life organizations. She said that while they were praying across the street from the main abortion mill in Houston a woman brought in her teenage daughter for an abortion. The mother came back out to scream at the protesters that she was saved and God has already forgiven her for getting her daughter's abortion.

Realizing that this is an extreme example (only in degree, not in kind), this is the main reason I could never be a Protestant. Once saved, always saved makes no sense, especially because it exists in the subjective theological context framed by Protestantism. Who's to say this woman is any different than the conservative Born Again who says that his recurring minor sins (white lies, watching a little porno, using contraceptives, having pre-marital sex, getting a little drunk once in awhile) are already forgiven by Jesus when He died on the Cross? And I mean "Who's to say" literally. Without any sort of final, central authority who *is* to say?

And the whole retroactive removal of the person from "the elect" ("Well, he was never really truly saved in the first place") always seemed like a theological cop-out to me.

[wmfights]

"I don't buy the "once saved always saved". I've known some incredibly hateful "Born Again Christians". They say that the Bible gives them license to hate and carve out the snippets of verse to support them."
_________________________________
I never thought you did think you had the blessed assurance of knowing JESUS has you in his hand and won't let go. If you thought that you couldn't be a Roman Catholic.

I'm sure we've all seen shocking things. I have yet to meet anyone who is SAVED by FAITH not by works who hasn't become a changed person. I've never met anyone who is SAVED who ran around claiming that gave them the right to be hateful. Born again Christians have a habit of reading their BIBLES and know that JESUS commanded us to love our neighbor.

You know you never really answered my question. What are the works your church demands of you in order to be in a state of grace?

[wmfights]

"Jesus sure seemed to disagree about faith alone vs. faith/works. Obey the commandments, lose your love of wealth, give charitably to the poor, follow Jesus, build up treasure in Heaven. Jesus makes a pretty interesting illustration about rewarding those who have given up family for His sake "a hundred times more"."
_______________________________________________

That sure is a legalistic interpretation of that passage. I read that passage and say thank you JESUS for saving my soul, because there is no way for me to be righteous by the law. I certainly agree that SCRIPTURE is very clear about rewards.

BTW, what will you do with the rewards bestowed upon you. I know what I will do with the few I receive.

[Clay+Iron_Times]

Rather, individual members of the Catholic Church on this forum are oftern obliged to bring the matter up when people palpably ignorant of easily attainable and verifiable history attempt to retroactively rewrite that history (or simply ignore it) to further a disingenuous agenda.

This should be easily attainable concerning these 2 sets of 10 Commandments illustrated below. Could someone tell me first as to why we have these variations. Please also give me a name or names of the persons involved in making this alteration. Because it is an alteration and not simply a misinterpretation

Are there any verifiable canons concerning this change, if so, what is the canon's number? Is this action found in The Canons & Decrees of the Council of Trent?

I found only this one:

Canon 1188. "The practice of displaying sacred images in the churches for the veneration of the faithful is to remain in force..."

There must have been some opposition to prompt a statement like that... what happened here?

Thanks in advance

The Bible's 10 Commandments (Ex 20:1-17)	Roman Catholic Bible's 10 Commandments (based on the Catechism)
1. I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other gods before me.	1. I am the Lord your God. You shall not have strange Gods before me.
2. Thou shall not make unto thee any graven image.	2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Thou shall not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.	3. Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day.
4. Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy.	4. Honor your father and your mother
5. Honor thy father and thy mother.	5. You shall not kill
6. Thy shall not kill.	6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. Thou shall not commit adultery.	7. You shall not steal.
8. Thou shall not steal.	8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. Thou shall not bear false witness.	9. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.
10. Thou shall not covet.	10. You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

[Clay+Iron_Times]

I just getting use to tables sorry about the size

[bondserv]

This protestant coverted to Judaism. :-)

In the graffed in sense?

Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

[Titanites]

Division of the Ten Commandments:

	Jewish Reckoning	Augustinian-Lutheran Reckoning	Orthodox-Reformed Reckoning
Introduction	And God spoke all these words, saying,	And God spoke all these words, saying, "I am the LORD your God."	And God spoke all these words, saying, "I am the LORD your God."
1st Word	"I am the LORD your God."	"You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image"	"You shall have no other gods before me."
2nd Word	"You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image."	"You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain."	"You shall not make for yourself a graven image."
3rd Word	"You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain."	"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."	"You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain."
4th Word	"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."	"Honor your father and your mother."	"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."
5th Word	"Honor your father and your mother."	"You shall not kill."	"Honor your father and your mother."
6th Word	"You shall not kill."	"You shall not commit adultery."	"You shall not kill."
7th Word	"You shall not commit adultery."	"You shall not steal."	"You shall not commit adultery."
8th Word	"You shall not steal."	"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."	"You shall not steal."
9th Word	"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."	"You shall not covet your neighbor's wife."	"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
10th Word	"You shall not covet your neighbor's wife; and you shall not desire anything that is your neighbor's."	"You shall not desire anything that is your neighbor's."	"You shall not covet your neighbor's wife; and you shall not desire anything that is your neighbor's."