Where Have All the Protestants Gone?

NOR ^ | January 2006 | Thomas Storck

[Conservative til I die]

So your more logical and less ludicrous claim is that these groups named in the Bible did not exist but that groups not named in the Bible did exist? That is a piece if I ever read one.

I don't really have time for these games tonight. However, I will indulge you this one time. It is you, not I that made the claim that because certain current Christian sects (e.g., Assemblies of God) share the same name as a certain phrase used to describe some believers in the Bible, that this current group therefore is the same group that existed in Biblical times and hence has some credible claim to being the true Christian sect.

This of course completely ignores nearly 2000 years of history and theology. No discussion of the similarities between today's AoG and the ancient AoG. No examination of Christian history to see if there is any direct lineage of today's AoG to the Christians of Biblical times that does not include the Reformation. No consideration that "assembly of God" is a somewhat generic descriptive of a body of Christians, rather than the "brand" name of a specific sect.

On the other hand, I merely indicated that the specific sect's "brand" name not being mentioned in Scripture does not *preclude* it from being the same church indicated in the Bible.

In no way did I state that not being mentioned in the Bible *makes* the Catholic Church the true Church. But I will say you are correct in one way: I am more logical and less ludicrous than you are being.

[annalex]

annalex stated to me that the HOLY SPIRIT did not indwell believers

You misunderstood 2060, which I clarified in 2127, -- do you still have questions?

[Cronos]

4  And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)

Says St. J went to Bethlehelm

5  To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

Says he took along Mary.  It doesn't actually say if he went alone or with his entire kit and kin and others... You're making an assumption aren't you, that he went alone.  Or are you relying on a traditional or pastor's interpretation?

Note that ALL went, but no other children went with Joseph and Mary because at this point THERE WERE NONE.

The verse doesn't actually say one way or the other that Joseph didn't take along his mom, pop, aunts and uncles and any brethern... 

[tenn2005]

We do not need to have "church fathers" to explain the scriptures to us as you claim that you need to have. If you need to rely on the explanation of men to understand the scriptures then that is your problem, not mine. Incidently, we also have church fathers. They are called Apostles and wrote most of the New Testament in a manner that we could study and understand it for oursleves. If we get it wrong we mislead only ourself. If the Pope gets it wrong he misleads the entire Catholic Church.

[tenn2005]

I never said that churches today by that name are the same as those who used that name in Bible days. I only said that the names they are calling themselves are found in the Bible. The rest of your argument is against a straw man of your own creation.

[Cronos]

I think you don't understand why Christians go to church. We don't go to have the church save us. We go for fellowship with other believers. We go to learn and grow as Christians and most importantly we go to share in honoring the LORD.
Duuuh.... what did I say? : "Nope, we're saying your induhvidual interpretation (like anyone's induhvidual interpretation) is inherently flawed. Christ gave us a community of believers to go and ponder His mission. That's the strength of the Church."

Though, as I said, if you ain't part of Christ's Church and following His teachings, I would mostly consider you non-Christian, just as I dont' consider Mormons or Unitarians or Jehovah's witnesses or Scientologists to be Christian.So, the little groupings can't be called a church, more a meeting room for a little song and dance with some guy shouting and gesticulating from a stage and imparting no knowledge to the people he/she has lead astray...

[tenn2005]

Are you referring to the mass in Latin which no one understands?

[Cronos]

The Bible says Mary and Joseph had sex.

Nope -- it doesn't and we've proved that again and again on this thread.  It doesn't go into such intimate details and you repeating it over and over again wont make it true

The Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters.

Nope -- it doesn't and we've proved that again and again on this thread.  You repeating it over and over again wont make it true

The Bible says Jesus was the firstborn, meaning other came after.

Nope -- it doesn't mean that, all it means is that Jesus was the first born from Mary, any thing else is pure conjecture.  You repeating it over and over again wont make it true

[Cronos]

It is evident that the Greek adelphos (brothers/sisters) is used in the case of Jesus' brothers and sisters in the flesh. And before you start there is also no evidence or reason to say that these were Joseph's children by a previous marriage.

There is no evidence one way or the other from Biblical tracts.

[Cronos]

And you over look and use the very plain message that James IS called the Lords brother

And Lot is called Abraham's brother....

[tenn2005]

The greek word adelphos literally means "of the same womb."

Theyer's Greek Lexicon

[Cronos]

Actually Dave, there are folks who completely discard everything considered Christian -- right from the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ downwards... They AREN'T Christian..

[tenn2005]

Why do you insist in going to the old Testament (Hebrew) to justify your erroneous understanding of the New Testament (Greek)?

[Cronos]

Though actually I must state that the person who doubted if St. Paul's Epistles are inspired later states that he is a Unitarian. The strange and opposting concepts clubbed under the Protestant banner...

[Cronos]

It would appear that those groups did exist and called themselves by those names.

All the groups of Christians in the 1st century were either: catholic orthodox beleivers or gnostics or vaguely Christianized Jews...

[Cronos]

Are you referring to the mass in Latin which no one understands?

Nope, I'm referring to televanglista phonies and other song-and-dance sing-a-long kumbaya groups that seem to call themselves christian when they are not. In short -- you not part of the Assyrian or Oriental or Orthodox or Catholic or some Anglican and Lutheran Churchs (that follow Apostolic succession), you chances are likely that you've not learnt Christ's Word and aren't Christian. It's sad to see so many led astray by 'pastors' and others who really deserve the blame for leading Christ's sheep astray.

[tenn2005]

All the groups of Christians in the 1st century were either: catholic orthodox beleivers or gnostics or vaguely Christianized Jews...
_____________________

Is this something that you have first hand knowledge of or something that you have been told by your "Church Fathers?"

[Cronos]

Is this something that you have first hand knowledge of or something that you have been told by your "Church Fathers?"

Nope, it's scriptural -- the early Christians believed in orthodoxy, not any doo-dah that the non-Apostolic groups do nowadays. Pure Manichaenism...

[tenn2005]

Please supply a scripture that states this

[Cronos]

read what they wrote and spoke about -- yons Catholic teachings...