Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Always Right

You wrote:

“Christ identified the Church as all who acknowledge Christ as their savior. Your whole premise is false.”

No, your premise is false. Your premise is anachronistic. you are a Protestant. You believe in Jesus as other Christians do. You read the NT and see in it that the Church is of te believers. You then, anachronistically, assume that that means your sect is incorporated into Christ or that you personally ar incorporated into Christ without any Church at all. Both assumptions are wrong. Christ established a Church. When He established it - and through out the NT period - the Church contained all the believers. Thus, when Jesus or the NT writers discuss the Church as being made up of all believers they are absolutely right. There was only one Church. Christ didn’t establish your sect. It didn’t exist until less than 500 years ago (more likely, much, much more recently than that).

“It is the Catholic Church which is based on tradttions of men. Just because Christ’s words were only later recored in the New Testament doesn’t mean a Bible based Church is therefore a sect. Your argument lacks logic.”

No, my argument is irrefutable. The Church came before the NT. Period. Irrefutable. Any sect today - like yours - that claims to be Bible based is really just a johnny-come-lately man-made sect based on the opinions of men.


13 posted on 07/16/2009 8:44:44 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: vladimir998
No, my argument is irrefutable. The Church came before the NT. Period. Irrefutable. Any sect today - like yours - that claims to be Bible based is really just a johnny-come-lately man-made sect based on the opinions of men.

First Jesus never established The Catholic Church. The rock the Church is built upon is Jesus, not a bunch of Popes. Secondly, your argument about when the Bible was written makes no sense. What Jesus said is the Truth, it didn't just become the Truth when they were written down. When they were written has no bearing on what constitutes a church. You argument is nonsensical unless you are implying the NT is inaccurate.

15 posted on 07/16/2009 9:03:17 AM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998
***No, my argument is irrefutable. The Church came before the NT. Period. Irrefutable.***

Since the church was before the New Testament, why do the sermons and letters of the Apostles differ so much from later church teaching? Can you reconcile wht is taught in ROMANS (the bible within a bible)with the early and later church fathers?

17 posted on 07/16/2009 9:29:58 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (La commedia e' finita!. Now it's serious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998
You believe in Jesus as other Christians do. You read the NT and see in it that the Church is of te believers. You then, anachronistically, assume that that means your sect is incorporated into Christ or that you personally ar incorporated into Christ without any Church at all. Both assumptions are wrong. Christ established a Church. When He established it - and through out the NT period - the Church contained all the believers.

But it doesn't contain any non-believers...You got the wrong Church...

Unless you can guarantee that Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi are in fact Christian believers, you got the wrong church...

There are absolutely NO unbelievers in the church of Jesus Christ...

Jesus did not establish a church to bring people to Him...The people that turned to Him ARE the church...

You got the wrong church...

72 posted on 07/16/2009 5:22:32 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998

“No, my argument is irrefutable. The Church came before the NT. Period. Irrefutable. Any sect today - like yours - that claims to be Bible based is really just a johnny-come-lately man-made sect based on the opinions of men.”

Tell me, what is Scripture? Is it not the teachings of the prophets, apsotles and the Lord Himself? Yes, it most certainly is. The Lord and the Apostles established the Church, which is His Body, to carry out His teachings. Thus the teachings came first.

When Protestants and Evangelicals insist on a Bible based Church, they are insisting on a Church that is rooted in the teachings of the prophets, apostles and the Lord Himself. Catholics insist on the same thing. So when a Protestant asks “Where’s that in the Bible?”, he is asking “When did Jesus teach that? What Apostle taught that? What prophet said that?”

It really is very simple. Unfortunately those among us who insist on dogmas that are not found in the teachings of any prophet, apsotle or the Lord Himself (some of the excess of Mariology and eschatology) try to downplay the importance of thos teachings.


95 posted on 07/17/2009 4:59:19 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson