Posted on 09/13/2013 8:33:37 AM PDT by marshmallow
“ROTFL, no, the Catholic denomination is just one of many Christian denominations.”
Nope. Protestant sects are denominations. There is no Catholic denomination. There is only the Catholic Church.
Also stained glass windows.
I try not to argue with Mormons and Catholics about their own unique internal beliefs, so good luck with yours, enjoy.
Certainly not the way you seem to be implying it there.
Matthew 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church [ekklésia]: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
Ekklésia
Transliteration: ekklésia
Phonetic Spelling: (ek-klay-see'-ah)
Short Definition: an assembly, congregation, church
Definition: an assembly, congregation, church; the Church, the whole body of Christian believers.
[http://biblesuite.com/strongs/greek/1577.htm]
There is no way to make the word ekklesia used in the context of Matthew 18 to mean an overriding authoritative organization such as the RCC. It was indeed the local assembly of believers that Matthew 18:17 was speaking about.
Using the word ecclesia, then corrupting it to mean “church” the way the RCC does it is just another error among many that has deceived people for which the RCC and it’s members will pay dearly.
“I try not to argue with Mormons and Catholics about their own unique internal beliefs, so good luck with yours, enjoy.”
It’s not about an internal belief. It’s about simple facts. The Catholic Church existed before all Protestants sects - which only go back to the 16th century. Only Protestants and their pseudo-Christian progeny (e.g. Mormonism) then can have denominations.
Weeellllll, I think it would be a presumption to say that Timothy was “taught” by his mother and grandmother. 2 Tim 1:5 simply says Timothy had the faith which first dwelt in his grandmother and mother. It really doesn’t specifically state that they taught him. Can’t say he was, can’t say he wasn’t.
>> And there was Priscilla in Acts.<<
Acts 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
Notice that her husband was with her and the teaching was done privately. That was one I had in mind when in my previous post I mentioned the women assisted the men and didn’t teach in public. As an aside notice the husbands name is listed first. Not sure that’s pertinent, just saying.
>> And someone else, I can’t remember right now. So there is a record of women teaching men.<<
You may be thinking of this?
Philippians 4:2 I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord. 3 And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.
What we don’t know is in what capacity they “laboured” with him. It doesn’t say they taught and with the abundance of scripture that teaches women should not teach in public one would think they didn’t.
Now, having said all that I truly wonder if “contend for the faith” and other admonishments to Christians exhort etc doesn’t come into play when in forums like this.
It took a good long time to get ministers in three piece suits with organ music, hymnals, and central heat. Clearly not following the Bible.
Or more recently pastors in blue jeans and sweaters with a 5 piece band and big cyclotron screens, that took a full 2,000 years to appear. Clearly not following the Bible ..... :-)
Illustrating absurdity thru absurdity.
Nobody is denying that Paul had revelations directly from God. But he also deferred to the authority of the apostles on some matters. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Here's an example in this passage from Acts. Since I'm always told by our Protestant brethren that Scripture is easily understood, there shouldn't be a problem here.
And some coming down from Judea, taught the brethren: That except you be circumcised after the manner of Moses, you cannot be saved. And when Paul and Barnabas had no small contest with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of the other side, should go up to the apostles and priests to Jerusalem about this question. They therefore being brought on their way by the church, passed through Phenice, and Samaria, relating the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church, and by the apostles and ancients, declaring how great things God had done with them. But there arose some of the sect of the Pharisees that believed, saying: They must be circumcised, and be commanded to observe the law of Moses.
And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Acts 15: 1-7
Did you get that? Paul and Barnabas became embroiled in a dispute with some from Judea over the question of circumcision. The resolution to this dispute came not via direct revelation from God, but through the elders in Jerusalem, in particular, St. Peter.
In the years before the New Testament appeared, the Church was not paralyzed. On the contrary, it went about its business, commissioning evangelists, teachers, priests, deacons and resolving disputes without reference to a book.
As the above passage from Acts makes perfectly clear, in the early Church, authority was human and not written.
"upon this rock I will build My church"...the Catholic church!!
the Catholic Church is not a denomination. The Protestant churches need a term such as denomination so you can tell them apart. There is "a Catholic Church" there is not "a Protestant church"....there are many thousands of protestant denominations, all of which think that they are "THE" one.
My beloved gran was named Lois and she was the one that prayed for me and gave me my first Bible.
I miss her so much, but I am so looking forward to seeing her again!
That is a wonderful testimony to your Bible study, smvoice. Excellent!
I wrote about this on another thread. Will see if I can find.
“I see incoming pizza.”
Let the pizza fly! We can handle it.
I have often wondered if we will have food in the coming Kingdom like we do here. I think we might but that everything there will be so heightened (senses including taste) it will not resemble the eating and tasting we do now.
Food for thought, and yes pun intended.
Tell yourself what you want, like I said, I try not to get into Mormon and Catholic church internal teachings for their members, but yes, the Catholics are members of one of the Christian denominations in America.
Looks like it will still be in use during the tribulation period.
My response was indeed a legitimate response to a post whose content betrays an ignorance of the definition of the word "cathedral", a confusion which can be cleared up with the use of a dictionary. But since the word, "dictionary" is nowhere to be found in the Bible, I figured that they could not be used. Come to think of it, the word "Bible" is nowhere to be found in the Bible, so I guess the Bible is off limits too. Dang, this is getting complicated. I'll try to guide through this patch of weeds.
And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.A synagog is Jewish place of worship. * Jesus went to synagog, as did the early Christians. Are you with me so far?
~ Matthew 4:23 (King James Version)
* Synagogs were also used for other ancillary purposes.
*************************************
*************************************
A church is Christian place of worship. The word "church" comes from the Greek, kyriak-ós/-ē/-ón, meaning "belonging, or pertaining, to a Kýrios" ("Lord").
So the difference between a synagog and a church is that one is Jewish, and the other Christian. One could say that in general, a synagog is a Jewish church, and a church is a Christian synagog. They are not entirely equal except in the area that we are discussing: they are both places of worship, but labeled through different languages.
So churches do indeed appear in the Bible, they were just referred to by a different name by the early Christians who were breaking away from their Jewish brethren.
Now, if you are going to say the churches the early Christians worshiped in, which were often houses bought in community and converted to meeting places, were not legitimate because they are not mentioned as such in the Bible, then we might as well end the discussion right here, because logic cannot prevail against such stubborn silliness. But if you acknowledge the legitimacy of churches in Christian worship, read on, Garth.
Now, here's where the dictionary comes in.
Where I think the confusion comes in is the fact that in the minds of the uneducated, the word "cathedral" means big ostentatious (dictionary opportunity) building, which it sometimes does.
Now if you will excuse me, I'm late for my Mary-worshiping meeting. Oh, and you're welcome.
I'm assuming your home has central heating, perhaps air conditioning, insulated walls, etc., you sometimes utilize an electric lamp to read by, and the Bible you read is type set.
Not one of those things is in the Bible.
And I'll bet your house is a veritable palace compared to the primitive communal houses the early Christians worshiped in. Since when did we start to need all these luxuries to worship God?
My, how far off track we have gotten.
“An “excuse”??
Yes, your excuse is that they didn’t “have a book”. You do.
“The event described in Acts clearly indicates how disputes, and questions of dogma were settled in the early Church; not by reference to a book. That is your point, isn’t it? We should conform to how things were done in the early Church, right?”
No. The Apostles were the foundation before the Scriptures were complete. We have them now. Use them.
“There was no book. Paul and Barnabas conferred with the Apostles.”
There were PLENTY of scrolls and letters circulating.
“This also clearly indicates that before the book, there already was the Church. That is, the Church gave us the Scriptures and not vice versa.”
God gave us the Scriptures by directly inspiring men to write his words. He started this during the Old Testament times thousands of years before His gathering.
“That is why Paul and Barnabas had no need of a book when it came to resolving the dispute over circumcision. They consulted the “apostles and ancients”. Likewise, evangelists had no need of a book. They were sent by the Apostles in the name of Jesus.”
No the answer is above.
This is precisely the model used by the Catholic Church.
We have lost all perspective, you’re right. My house probably does seem to be a castle compared to the early believers. (that makes me laugh just to say “castle” and “my house” in the same sentence). God bless us all and give us all the desire to open our “churches/castles” to those in desperate need of His love and reconciliation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.