Where Have All the Protestants Gone?

NOR ^ | January 2006 | Thomas Storck

[Invincibly Ignorant]

see 59

[markomalley]

In those days the issue of the procession of the Holy Spirit was accepted as a perfect triune relationship. eg. Father, Son and Holy Spirit with the HS coming from co-equal contributions from both the Father and the Son.

This new roman bishop decided to throw his weight around. So, he deliberitly issued an inflammatory letter proclaiming that the HS only followed from the Father through the Son and then on down to the Holy Spirit.

---

Excuse me? It was the Latins who had the Filoque in the Nicene Creed. (I believe in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son).

So what, exactly, are you trying to say here??

[Zack Nguyen]

Right back at ya!

[Mr. Lucky]

The orthodox synods of the Lutheran Church understand the concept of Apostolic succession, they just don't attribute any particular significance to it; much the same as, say, they understand denominations which speak in tongues or impose particular dress codes.

If recognition of Apostolic succession is important to you and strengthens your faith, great. But to others of us, it's just not relevant.

[SoothingDave]

30 years later. Thought we were talking about the first Christians?

Yes, the very same people, the Apostles. The issue of dealing with the spread of the faith outside of the Jewish community was not an instant problem.

By the way, even after that decision the first "Christians" remained observant.

Read it again. They may have volunteered to abide by their familiar customs, but could not bind those upon any believer. Which is what I said "that it was not necessary to observe Jewish things in order to be a follower of Jesus."

SD

[NYer]

I'm simply a follower of the Christ, Y'shua

Then why not follow His Church? According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many. Also, since the Church is Christ's Bride (Ephesians 5:29), can Christ be married to more than one wife (the sin of polygamy)? NO, Christ can only have one wife (i.e., one Church, not many).

[SoothingDave]

The orthodox synods of the Lutheran Church understand the concept of Apostolic succession, they just don't attribute any particular significance to it; much the same as, say, they understand denominations which speak in tongues or impose particular dress codes.

Jesus never spoke in tongues or imposed a dress code. He did, however, physically impart His Spirit upon the Apostles and charge them to implement His Sacraments.

If sacraments aren't important, I can see discounting Apostolic succession. But you can't have one without he other. How does one have this power if it is not given?

SD

[HarleyD]

Apparently, though, it is the case that some Protestants call themselves Christians, not out of a desire to usurp the term, but out of an immense ignorance of history. That is, they ignore history to such an extent that they really don't understand that they are Protestants. Knowing or caring little about what came before them, they act as if their nicely bound Bibles had fallen directly from Heaven and anyone could simply become a Christian with no reference to past history, ecclesiology, or theology.... Even Luther or Calvin or John Wesley mean little to them, since they can pick up their Bibles and start Christianity over again any time they want.

There is a great deal of truth in this statement.

From one of the few PROTESTant left.

[STD]

You are correct, that's why what this bishop from Rome was saying was such a problem. The Eastern church had finally had enough. This bishop was also living with several women and had bastard sons and daughters all over the place. After all he's just an ordinary man with all the problems you and I have each day, SIN!

[markomalley]

Your claim about Peter and the Popes though is wrong. If you read the entire passage and context of the passage the "ROCK" to which JESUS is referring to is him being the Messiah and that salvation would only be found through faith in him.

---

Please re-read what I posted. I didn't bring up the subject of 'rock' at all one way or the other. I brought up the subject of 'keys' ... and what the symbolic meaning of that was. I even took the time to show you the prophecy from Isiah that showed what the actual meaning of the expression 'keys of the kingdom of heaven' is.

---

However, you mentioned 'rock.' So we can discuss 'rock', although it is sort of irrelevant to the discussion.

You realize that Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, right?

If you take a look at the Peshitta Aramaic text, both the words translated Petra and Petros are actually the Aramaic word "keepa" (thus the term "Cephas" being applied to Simon). Check it out for yourself!

[Flavius Josephus]

Thou Art Lukewarm, and I shall Sppppeeeeeewwww thee out of my mouth.

[SoothingDave]

This bishop was also living with several women and had bastard sons and daughters all over the place. After all he's just an ordinary man with all the problems you and I have each day, SIN!

Infallibility is not the same thing as impeccibility. There's even two different words for it!

SD

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Read it again. They may have volunteered to abide by their familiar customs, but could not bind those upon any believer. Which is what I said "that it was not necessary to observe Jewish things in order to be a follower of Jesus."

I never said it was either. Just making an observation that the first Christians don't resemble the Catholic Church. I'm right.

[Flavius Josephus]

The Creeds are the basic Dogma of Christ's Church, to identify it against those, like the Gnostics, who would have bastardized it. Jesus spoke of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete), about his Church, and the Saints (those who would be with him in Heaven.)

No, of course Jesus did not, since they were not written. One doesn't have to say what they say, or believe what they tell you to believe, in order to call oneself a christian. You don't have to believe in the Trinity, You don't even have to believe Jesus is God. No, you only have to do those things to really BE a Christian.

[Uri’el-2012]

XS>I'm simply a follower of the Christ, Y'shua

NY>Then why not follow His Church? According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many. Also, since the Church is Christ's Bride (Ephesians 5:29), can Christ be married to more than one wife (the sin of polygamy)? NO, Christ can only have one wife (i.e., one Church, not many).

66 posted on 02/15/2006 9:10:45 AM MST by NYer

I'm afraid you have de-constructed the word "church"
which means "called out ones" into a corporation or
a man-made organization.
I know that I am "a called out one".

b'shem Y'shua

[SoothingDave]

Just making an observation that the first Christians don't resemble the Catholic Church. I'm right.

Acorns don't look a heck of a lot like oak trees either.

SD

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Acorns don't look a heck of a lot like oak trees either.

True. But that doesn't mean a blind squirrel won't find one from time to time. :-)

[Mr. Lucky]

Of course the Sacraments (however many of them there are) are important. But in the Lutheran tradition, the clergy is called by the holy spirit directly, not by a bishop (an office which doesn't exist in my denomination).

[Salvation]

Catholics believe that a call to the priesthood of the religious life comes from the Holy Spirit.

Where did you obotain your misinformation?

[markomalley]

You are correct, that's why what this bishop from Rome was saying was such a problem. The Eastern church had finally had enough. This bishop was also living with several women and had bastard sons and daughters all over the place. After all he's just an ordinary man with all the problems you and I have each day, SIN!

---

First, you are aware, I'm sure, that the Filoque was added by Rome to the Creed of Nicea-Constantinople, right?

Second, do you have your Popes right? St. Leo IX was occupying the See of Peter when the great schism of 1054 happened. You might be referring to Benedict IX (who was Pope up until 1045), who was, rightly, known as a disgrace.