You logic is circular. God’s word is the final authority. True. But He gave this authority to teach His truth only to Peter and his apostles. “Whatsoever thou shall bound on earth shall be bond in Heaven.” This is what the early Church fathers accepted, believed, and practice as an unbroken line of succession to Peter- the early Popes and saints.
Of course all this goes over the heads of low-information Christain Protestants who think their local Foursquare Church Paster gets it right. The Mormons and Jehovah’s witness thought so too. As did Tammy Faye Baker, Jimmy Swaggart; David Koresh, Jim Jones, Rev. Jeremiah Wright; Rev. Sharpton; Rev. Moon; and the rest of the wild mushrooms that have sprung around the great Mustard Tree. Many of these denominations have had evolving doctrine, and broken apart into dozens of different sects. This is why no serious theological scholar holds onto any single Protestant denomination.
Easy to establish a Protestant faith? Get your self some good speaking lessons; throw some rock’n background music, even better get yourself a pretty wife, don’t say anything to upset your congregation, plant a cross in the front yard, surround it with some inviting foliage, and have vapid and meaningless ‘Sunday Services” by shouting out verses from Scripture, and viola, we have a new Protestant religion.
Of course it is TRUE. God's Word is the ONLY TRUTH there is. Throw away the catechism if you believe it's true; otherwise, your 'true' response means NOTHING and is only dribble.
But He gave this authority to teach His truth only to Peter and his apostles.
FALSE!! That's what Rome taught before God's Word was snatched from them. NOW everyone of us is responsible for learning HIS TRUTH and HE equipped those who WANT TO KNOW His Truth with The Holy Spirit. God is a personal God and each one is personally responsible for themselves. Paul is the one HE revealed His mystery to and Paul wrote over 1/2 of the NT. That should bring some light to the darkness of catholicism. God has appointed Holy Spirit filled teachers who teach HIS WORD ALONE. His HS filled believers know TRUTH when they hear it and know deception before it turns the corner. They are well-equipped as only God equips His own.
This is what the early Church fathers accepted, believed, and practice as an unbroken line of succession to Peter- the early Popes and saints.
I left that 'counterfeit teachings' in the mud from which it came - it's Rome's dribble to deceive those who can be deceived. Show where God gave anyone 'the counterfeit teachings of man', the catechism for one, to teach. And please don't use popes as anything credible! What's wrong, suddenly history of 'Rome's incorrigible 'religious' leaders is something not to believe? Only the worse of the worst made the hit parade. What about the 'I'm all yours, Mary' one. Man giving himself over to man. That didn't end well. He had no Savior as he gave himself to Mary and Mary cannot save. There is only ONE Savior and that is Jesus. Basic Christianity and he didn't even get that right. Worldly teaching got to him - his choice. And what did Rome do?...they dug him up to honor him - honor 'man' as it is 'their way'. He must have been one of their best...as he didn't know basic Christianity but practiced idolatry - 'The catholic mascot'. Satan really is a trip - he's having fun at the cost of souls for eternity. Yet, the deceived continue to embrace his teachings. Their elevator is obviously stuck on stupid and no 'light' goes on.
Of course all this goes over the heads of low-information Christain Protestants who think their local Foursquare Church Paster gets it right
Low information, again? Slow learner comes to mind in that response. The ONLY ONE who has it right is JESUS The Word and He shared His Word as His own gave up their life for His will/His Word to be spread world wide. And that still grates Rome! They didn't take His Word seriously when He said 'the gates of hell will not prevail against HIS CHURCH'. Shame on them as they refused correction and then went on to produce "their word", the catechism. Not taking Patient GOD seriously will produce His Wrath eventually as HIS age of Grace closes soon. HIS WORD IS FINAL - He has the First Word and the Last! Satan and his 'man made teachings' are such a loser, yet....
This is why no serious theological scholar holds onto any single Protestant denomination.
Theological Scholar! And totally without The Spirit. A dime a dozen. Save the RCC WORLDLY concept of things - they are corrupt to the core when it comes to the things of God!
Easy to establish a Protestant faith? Get your self some good speaking lessons; throw some rock’n background music, even better get yourself a pretty wife, don’t say anything to upset your congregation, plant a cross in the front yard, surround it with some inviting foliage, and have vapid and meaningless ‘Sunday Services” by shouting out verses from Scripture, and viola, we have a new Protestant religion.
Sounds catholic to me minus the wife (as some prefer boys) as the catholic church produces worldly-minded creatures and it shows. Like I said before - catholics have been so deceived they have no idea what to look for in a church. Where's the incense, the fine linen and Jesus nailed to The Cross, the confession booth and a statue of Mary and 'saints' and holy water and beads to keep us on track? - this can't be a true church. They only know what they are taught by man. Lest catholics feel left out, Mormons and muslims are in the same boat. Satan doesn't care what unbelievers call themselves or gimmicks they use to appear holy - as long as he has their soul. Now Truth evades them - they don't even recognize It when it's presented to them. Being easy prey comes at a very high price for eternity.
Psst! I got info for you - Jesus has nothing to do with 'religion' it's all about a relationship. So much for 'low information' - catholics apparently were served the whole cake! All they do is compare 'religions' as they fight for some credence. They have a long haul before they come out of the hole they dug themselves and the time is short - so not much hope left - while satan does his 'I got them dance'. BTW, there is no purgatory but there is fire and it's hell where 'man made teachings' end up as everything NOT of God is burned up - except man because the spirit lives forever with WHO they choose to believe and obey here. No one can serve two masters.
'Man made teachings' originated for the sole purpose to deceive. That's all satan has is deception. Learning of his deception in Genesis is each one's responsibility - and catholics, mormons and muslims left their learning up to man. Imagine that - man leaving their eternal destiny up to 'man'. One could say they deserve what they get if it were not so FINAL.
Since you brought up scholarship and that is what appears you seek, Daniel1212 has instructed here many many times and he is to be commended for his Biblical teachings and PATIENCE with the unlearned. How much of it did you absorb or even care to absorb as the clock ticks away? No need to answer, it's just me thinking out loud about the grace of God.
God's WORD IS THE FINAL Authority and HIS SPIRIT is The Teacher.
Actually, Scripture is the assured word of God, being wholly inspired by Him, but it is NOT the supreme or final authority for an RC, leaving the RC logic to be circular. Thus RCs stedfastly refused to answer the questions such as i asked of you as well. Again:
What is the basis (Scripture, etc.) for your full assurance that Rome is the One True Church?
Does having historical descent, and being the steward of Scripture, and the magisterium over God's people, require or render such infallible? Or are otherwise authoritative so that no one it rejects have no valid authority?
Is an infallible magisterium necessary to determine and establish writings as being Scripture, and what truth is, and preserve it?
But He gave this authority to teach His truth only to Peter and his apostles. “Whatsoever thou shall bound on earth shall be bond in Heaven...
Its "bind" on earth, bound in Heaven, but what this means, in the light of the rest of Scripture (which does not support what Rome extrapolates from it for themselves), is a matter of interpretation. And the reason you believe it to be Rome cannot be because this is what an objective examination of Scripture leads to, as this is not supposed to be the RCs basis for determining Truth. Thus your answer to question #1 must be dealt with.
This is what the early Church fathers accepted,
That the rock of My. 16:18 was Peter, and that he reigned supreme over all the NT church to whom they look to as its infallible head, or even in Rome, is not what either Scripture teaches or what all the post apostolic early (so-called) Church fathers testified to. Even RC scholarship substantiates otherwise. As shown in this FR post. Stop parroting uninformed RC assertions as arguments.
Of course all this goes over the heads of low-information Christain Protestants
Actually, it is RC posters as you, which make up the majority, that testify they are low-information RCs, blissfully unaware of what refutes them, but parrot each other.
The Mormons and Jehovah’s witness thought so too.
And which operates under the same premise of Rome, that of the sola ecclesia model, in which the church is effectively or formally held to be assuredly correct in its interpretation of Scripture, Tradition, and history.
Rome itself has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares. Talk about circularity.
As did Tammy Faye Baker, Jimmy Swaggart; David Koresh, Jim Jones, Rev. Jeremiah Wright; Rev. Sharpton; Rev. Moon;
And how could these, as well as cults who dent core truths we both concur on, as well as liberal revisionism, be censored by historical evangelicalism, which was a reaction against such, if they were not unified in core salvific truths, despite things they disagree on?
Meanwhile, if sola ecclesia is the answer, then why do we see divisions btwn those who operate under it, including the EOs and Rome, with their substantial disagreements, despite being unified in core salvific truths?
What apparently goes over RC heads is that there own model for assuredly determining Truth invalidates the church itself.
Many of these denominations have had evolving doctrine
Oh, and Rome does not, even if under the guise of "reformulation" and interpretation? Tell me how any Trinitarian baptized Prot., esp. conservative evangelical converts from Rome, can be considered to be part of the church when it is also taught that,
“We declare, say, define, and pronounce [ex cathedra] that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” — Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Promulgated November 18, 1302) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html
"alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium." - Satis Cognitum (# 9): June 29, 1896: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum_en.html
...schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart `into everlasting fire...no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” — Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull promulgated on February 4, 1441 (Florentine style)
Then you have submission to the pope in past centuries requiring carrying out papal sanction of torture and killing (murder) of theological dissenters, even like myself, while in a another century (having lost her unBiblical use of the sword of men), such is considered evil.
And there are other examples .
This is why no serious theological scholar holds onto any single Protestant denomination.
I hope not, as it would be cultic to consider any single Protestant denomination as constituting the one true church, as in Scripture this refers to the household of God, or faith, which Christ is married to, (Eph. 2:19; 5:25-32; Gal., 6:10) the universal body of Christ, into which the Spirit baptized believers in conversion. (1Cor. 12:13)
Easy to establish a Protestant faith?
Of course it is easy as your definition of of what constitutes "Protestant" is based on not being in communion with Rome and thus even includes cults, but which operate under the model of Rome. And what you describe is that of a Joel Osteen type church, which is censured by those of the type of faith which you contend with here. Moreover, as told you before, a valid comparison is not btwn one particular church versus a broad spectrum of churches, but btwn the basis for each.
The fact is that it is easy to establish a sola ecclesia church as well. The question is, if the Roman model is correct, then how could souls be right, and have assurance of faith, in following a holy reformer in the desert who ate insects, and an itinerant preacher when both of them were rejected by those who sat in the seat of Moses? But which Preacher established His claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power.
Which the gospel of Rome is not, and its overall fruit has been that of a institutionalized church which has produced a past and present populace which is manifestly spiritually dead, or a few with blind zeal, and which have no fellowship of the Spirit, resulting from a shared personal conversion to the risen Lord Jesus and Christ-centered relationship, and which transcends external tribalism.