And all those groups claim it. Do you think the differences there are minor?
explain all the false teachings and dogmas and debauchery that happened within that very same organization.
Not one of these sinners and debauchers are the Church. That's the point. The Church is not any man.
Some things from some "church doctors" were accepted and others weren't. Some never had unaminous consent and some of those very same people were later kicked out for heresy.
And ditto the above.
You have a history of even Popes being involved with all kinds of sexual sins and debauchery
Ditto, ditto, ditto.
I'm curious, if this is your position then no sinner or debaucher can be the authority on Scripture and theology - so much for the Protestant Principle. If you have a problem with sinners, debauched individuals determining teaching then you should have a problem with each individual determining them - not with the Church.
Yes, some believe we are chosen before time began to be saved and there are Scriptures that seem to say that and there are other Scriptures that say we have free will to believe.
This is no little thing. Our faith in it's essence is who we are, who God is, and what our relationship to each other and God is and should be. The basics are radically different if you don't believe in free will and believe God's grace is not freely offered. Huge difference between a just and injust God and between what Christ's ministry was.
There certainly is a role for the local church to be the gathering place for like-minded people so that they can edify each other and worship and glorify God together as well as learn his truths together.
St. Paul was a bit more strict about what the Church is than you. E.g., what it means to not discern the Body in Holy Communion. He didn't teach this as a little disagreement.
I think it is wrong to assume there is only one physical "super-church" that we must all join and bow to.
The Church is the Body of Christ. You don't bow to it, you become One with Christ in the Body of Christ - as Jesus prayed in the garden.
The real church of Christ IS that spiritual one…
It is that, but it is also the Body of Christ, the Communion of Saints. It is apostolic and it has authority for teaching, as St. Paul and Peter and Thomas, etc. did.
It is not each individual, a Bible, and Christ. This is most clearly not what Jesus established or prayed for, for us.
My point is that your view would mean Christ failed from the get-go. You have no more authority than Calvin or the neighborhood Gnostic. There is no reasonable possibility of a Church holding the same basics of faith. It would be as foolish as if the founding fathers had decided to make one nation with each individual determining what the constitution meant. Imagine our nation if they had established that as a nation. Imagine Christianity if Christ had established this individual authority as His Church.
It just fails on its face; the failure is all around us and easily predictable. That's why Jesus did not establish your view of Church.
thanks again for your reply.
If anyone says the Gospel is something other than what is clearly stated in Scripture, then, no, they cannot claim they are right anymore than one church claiming it has the copyright to the name Christian. Some differences ARE minor, BTW, and with those we have liberty in Christ to decide between us and the Lord.
Not one of these sinners and debauchers are the Church. That's the point. The Church is not any man.
Excuse me? Those sinners and debauchers claimed to BE the hierarchy of THE CHURCH. I'm talking about Popes, bishops, and the like. They claimed to be the "magesterium" of the Catholic Church. Yet, I agree they were NOT members of the actual church of Christ, because, if they were, they would NOT have ever indulged in such overt licentiousness. The Church is NOT any man, true, but it is ALL of mankind that has accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. We are members of that spiritual body of Christ, the bride of Christ.
I'm curious, if this is your position then no sinner or debaucher can be the authority on Scripture and theology - so much for the Protestant Principle. If you have a problem with sinners, debauched individuals determining teaching then you should have a problem with each individual determining them - not with the Church.
My point is simply that had the very Apostles exhibited the behavior that those within the ruling authority of the church which claims it alone IS the church Christ established - that hell itself would not prevail against - then I doubt Jesus would have allowed them to represent him. Judas was wrong in what he did and he proved his unbelief by his actions and he was not and would never have been an apostle to the church. Perhaps if he had repented and confessed his faith in the Messiah, he may have been rehabilitated and used of the Lord, but we will never know since, instead of doing that, he killed himself. So many times we have heard on this forum words to the effect that the Roman Catholic Church is the one, true church of Christ and whenever anyone tried to clarify that we are all members of the church of Christ it is denied and condemned. So you cannot separate what you have consistently defined as the "church" from the individuals that make up the leadership - and the authority - of that church.
My point is that your view would mean Christ failed from the get-go. You have no more authority than Calvin or the neighborhood Gnostic. There is no reasonable possibility of a Church holding the same basics of faith. It would be as foolish as if the founding fathers had decided to make one nation with each individual determining what the constitution meant. Imagine our nation if they had established that as a nation. Imagine Christianity if Christ had established this individual authority as His Church. It just fails on its face; the failure is all around us and easily predictable. That's why Jesus did not establish your view of Church.
How I wish I could get you to comprehend what I am trying to say. Just as the individuals assented to the articles of the constitution and agreed to the basic doctrines of liberty and freedom to together establish the nation, we Christians can belong to the universal body of Christ and hold to the basic tenets of what it means to be a Christian. The Catholic Church has not demonstrated that it IS that church established by Christ so therefore it cannot demand allegiance to it in order for a person to be saved. Being a Christian is not and never has been the same thing as being a Catholic. You have said so yourself. Those who in the past and even now veer from the basic tenets of Christian living - of holiness and obedience to God - and who have no desire to repent are simply NOT part of the body of Christ. We are called-out, separated from the world and set apart to live holy and just lives, exactly how Jesus intended us to. That is NOT how the organization known as the Roman Catholic Church has presented itself in real life. Sure it demands that ideal of its members but it seems to exempt the upper echelon from living under those same rules. THAT, my FRiend, is why I KNOW that the RCC is not THE church. And further, even if all those "indiscretions" could be ignored, there are still major doctrinal errors where they have gone astray from where the early church had been.
This failure that you claim to see around you which you blame on Protestants is not because of separation from the errant medieval church, but what was prophesied would happen in the end times, a falling away and apostasy, and it happens within the Catholic Church as well as other mainline churches. There is and always will be a remnant of those who do not fall away but who remain faithful to Jesus Christ. THAT is the true church, the body of Christ.