You wrote:
“Oh, then you are a Protestant.”
Nope.
“But I don’t think they ‘accept’ Christ.”
As much as they know how which means not as much as can be done.
“If that works for you and them, well OK.”
It isn’t the same. A Protestant, being by nature an indifferentist, might equate them, however.
“Christians enter into a personal relationship with Jesus.”
That’s part of it, but that is also a largely modern and modernistic concept that not even Protestants espoused in such language more than 200 years ago.
“That’s what defines a Christian. Period.”
No, not really. The relationship itself has to be defined. What if someone enters in a relationship with Jesus as a prophet, but not as a Savior, or as a savior but not as the Son of God?
“Jesus is a lot more than acceptable.”
But claiming to not be a Protestant when you are one isn’t.
“Christians don’t have to be “accepted” by a sect, neither Rome, Catholicism or Protestantism.”
Rome is a city, not a sect. Catholicism can never be a sect. It is the Church and her teachings. Protestantism is a body of sects. The Church was founded and sent by God and is necessary.
“God’s true Church is the totality of all Christians.”
No. First, you have the problem of so-called Christians who do not really believe in Jesus as Christians must: Mormons are an obvious example. Oneness Pentecostals are another example. Then you have the problem of sects in general. Christ never said nor taught that all people claiming to be His followers were part of the Church. Look at Matthew 7:21 for instance.
“No buildings, vestments etc necessary.”
Is that an attempt at posting a complete thought?
“It’s a glorious reality!”
Christianity emptied of the Church is not a glorious reality. It is a Protestant fiction.
“Once you become a Christian, then it is time to gather together with others to worship God and fellowship.”
No. One cannot be a full Christian without the Church. The Church is not just about a way of worship or fellowship. The Church is the Bride of Christ.
“Buildings work fine for that.”
Buildings?
“Oh PS, I don’t really read your posts completely as they are just the same lies and pompous prouncements over and over again.”
I already knew you didn’t read the posts all the way through. You’re a Protestant. That’s typical. Remember, as I have said all along, you can’t make an argument.
“But this is fun to engage in when I am bored.”
Not as much fun as watching you fail repeatedly at making an argument.
"Christians enter into a personal relationship with Jesus."*sigh*That’s part of it, but that is also a largely modern and modernistic concept that not even Protestants espoused in such language more than 200 years ago. [Vladi, Christians "espoused" that ever since Jesus started His ministry on earth. The language doesn't matter, it's the same in all languages. What happened later only matters to you so you can argue with me]
It's intellectualizing like that which can block the wonderful "saved" personal relationship with Jesus.
It far too simple to understand for those that are educated past their ability to allow themselves to enter into the spiritual reality called Christianity.
LOL, it was defined by Jesus 2000 yrs ago.“Christians enter into a personal relationship with Jesus.”
“That's what defines a Christian. Period.”
No, not really. The relationship itself has to be defined. What if someone... etc etc extraneous wordplay to block that relationship with Jesus.
Those ready for that relationship just simply take Jesus at his word and enter into everlasting life.
Relying too much on man and his institutions can hinder one's spiritual life.