Posted on 05/17/2012 5:40:57 PM PDT by Gamecock
Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why.....
The number of people who have left the Catholic church is huge.
We all have heard stories about why people leave. Parents share stories about their children. Academics talk about their students. Everyone has a friend who has left.
While personal experience can be helpful, social science research forces us to look beyond our circle of acquaintances to see what is going on in the whole church.
The U.S. Religious Landscape Survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life has put hard numbers on the anecdotal evidence: One out of every 10 Americans is an ex-Catholic. If they were a separate denomination, they would be the third-largest denomination in the United States, after Catholics and Baptists. One of three people who were raised Catholic no longer identifies as Catholic.
Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why. But the U.S. bishops have never devoted any time at their national meetings to discussing the exodus. Nor have they spent a dime trying to find out why it is happening.
Thankfully, although the U.S. bishops have not supported research on people who have left the church, the Pew Center has.
Pew’s data shows that those leaving the church are not homogenous. They can be divided into two major groups: those who become unaffiliated and those who become Protestant. Almost half of those leaving the church become unaffiliated and almost half become Protestant. Only about 10 percent of ex-Catholics join non-Christian religions. This article will focus on Catholics who have become Protestant. I am not saying that those who become unaffiliated are not important; I am leaving that discussion to another time.
Why do people leave the Catholic church to become Protestant? Liberal Catholics will tell you that Catholics are leaving because they disagree with the church’s teaching on birth control, women priests, divorce, the bishops’ interference in American politics, etc. Conservatives blame Vatican II, liberal priests and nuns, a permissive culture and the church’s social justice agenda.
One of the reasons there is such disagreement is that we tend to think that everyone leaves for the same reason our friends, relatives and acquaintances have left. We fail to recognize that different people leave for different reasons. People who leave to join Protestant churches do so for different reasons than those who become unaffiliated. People who become evangelicals are different from Catholics who become members of mainline churches.
Spiritual needs
The principal reasons given by people who leave the church to become Protestant are that their “spiritual needs were not being met” in the Catholic church (71 percent) and they “found a religion they like more” (70 percent). Eighty-one percent of respondents say they joined their new church because they enjoy the religious service and style of worship of their new faith.
In other words, the Catholic church has failed to deliver what people consider fundamental products of religion: spiritual sustenance and a good worship service. And before conservatives blame the new liturgy, only 11 percent of those leaving complained that Catholicism had drifted too far from traditional practices such as the Latin Mass.
Dissatisfaction with how the church deals with spiritual needs and worship services dwarfs any disagreements over specific doctrines. While half of those who became Protestants say they left because they stopped believing in Catholic teaching, specific questions get much lower responses. Only 23 percent said they left because of the church’s teaching on abortion and homosexuality; only 23 percent because of the church’s teaching on divorce; only 21 percent because of the rule that priests cannot marry; only 16 percent because of the church’s teaching on birth control; only 16 percent because of the way the church treats women; only 11 percent because they were unhappy with the teachings on poverty, war and the death penalty.
The data shows that disagreement over specific doctrines is not the main reason Catholics become Protestants. We also have lots of survey data showing that many Catholics who stay disagree with specific church teachings. Despite what theologians and bishops think, doctrine is not that important either to those who become Protestant or to those who stay Catholic.
People are not becoming Protestants because they disagree with specific Catholic teachings; people are leaving because the church does not meet their spiritual needs and they find Protestant worship service better.
Nor are the people becoming Protestants lazy or lax Christians. In fact, they attend worship services at a higher rate than those who remain Catholic. While 42 percent of Catholics who stay attend services weekly, 63 percent of Catholics who become Protestants go to church every week. That is a 21 percentage-point difference.
Catholics who became Protestant also claim to have a stronger faith now than when they were children or teenagers. Seventy-one percent say their faith is “very strong,” while only 35 percent and 22 percent reported that their faith was very strong when they were children and teenagers, respectively. On the other hand, only 46 percent of those who are still Catholic report their faith as “very strong” today as an adult.
Thus, both as believers and as worshipers, Catholics who become Protestants are statistically better Christians than those who stay Catholic. We are losing the best, not the worst.
Some of the common explanations of why people leave do not pan out in the data. For example, only 21 percent of those becoming Protestant mention the sex abuse scandal as a reason for leaving. Only 3 percent say they left because they became separated or divorced.
Becoming Protestant
If you believed liberals, most Catholics who leave the church would be joining mainline churches, like the Episcopal church. In fact, almost two-thirds of former Catholics who join a Protestant church join an evangelical church. Catholics who become evangelicals and Catholics who join mainline churches are two very distinct groups. We need to take a closer look at why each leaves the church.
Fifty-four percent of both groups say that they just gradually drifted away from Catholicism. Both groups also had almost equal numbers (82 percent evangelicals, 80 percent mainline) saying they joined their new church because they enjoyed the worship service. But compared to those who became mainline Protestants, a higher percentage of those becoming evangelicals said they left because their spiritual needs were not being met (78 percent versus 57 percent) and that they had stopped believing in Catholic teaching (62 percent versus 20 percent). They also cited the church’s teaching on the Bible (55 percent versus 16 percent) more frequently as a reason for leaving. Forty-six percent of these new evangelicals felt the Catholic church did not view the Bible literally enough. Thus, for those leaving to become evangelicals, spiritual sustenance, worship services and the Bible were key. Only 11 percent were unhappy with the church’s teachings on poverty, war, and the death penalty Ñ the same percentage as said they were unhappy with the church’s treatment of women. Contrary to what conservatives say, ex-Catholics are not flocking to the evangelicals because they think the Catholic church is politically too liberal. They are leaving to get spiritual nourishment from worship services and the Bible.
Looking at the responses of those who join mainline churches also provides some surprising results. For example, few (20 percent) say they left because they stopped believing in Catholic teachings. However, when specific issues were mentioned in the questionnaire, more of those joining mainline churches agreed that these issues influenced their decision to leave the Catholic church. Thirty-one percent cited unhappiness with the church’s teaching on abortion and homosexuality, women, and divorce and remarriage, and 26 percent mentioned birth control as a reason for leaving. Although these numbers are higher than for Catholics who become evangelicals, they are still dwarfed by the number (57 percent) who said their spiritual needs were not met in the Catholic church.
Thus, those becoming evangelicals were more generically unhappy than specifically unhappy with church teaching, while those who became mainline Protestant tended to be more specifically unhappy than generically unhappy with church teaching. The unhappiness with the church’s teaching on poverty, war and the death penalty was equally low for both groups (11 percent for evangelicals; 10 percent for mainline).
What stands out in the data on Catholics who join mainline churches is that they tend to cite personal or familiar reasons for leaving more frequently than do those who become evangelicals. Forty-four percent of the Catholics who join mainline churches say that they married someone of the faith they joined, a number that trumps all doctrinal issues. Only 22 percent of those who join the evangelicals cite this reason.
Perhaps after marrying a mainline Christian and attending his or her church’s services, the Catholic found the mainline services more fulfilling than the Catholic service. And even if they were equally attractive, perhaps the exclusion of the Protestant spouse from Catholic Communion makes the more welcoming mainline church attractive to an ecumenical couple.
Those joining mainline communities also were more likely to cite dissatisfaction of the Catholic clergy (39 percent) than were those who became evangelical (23 percent). Those who join mainline churches are looking for a less clerically dominated church.
Lessons from the data
There are many lessons that we can learn from the Pew data, but I will focus on only three.
First, those who are leaving the church for Protestant churches are more interested in spiritual nourishment than doctrinal issues. Tinkering with the wording of the creed at Mass is not going to help. No one except the Vatican and the bishops cares whether Jesus is “one in being” with the Father or “consubstantial” with the Father. That the hierarchy thinks this is important shows how out of it they are.
While the hierarchy worries about literal translations of the Latin text, people are longing for liturgies that touch the heart and emotions. More creativity with the liturgy is needed, and that means more flexibility must be allowed. If you build it, they will come; if you do not, they will find it elsewhere. The changes that will go into effect this Advent will make matters worse, not better.
Second, thanks to Pope Pius XII, Catholic scripture scholars have had decades to produce the best thinking on scripture in the world. That Catholics are leaving to join evangelical churches because of the church teaching on the Bible is a disgrace. Too few homilists explain the scriptures to their people. Few Catholics read the Bible.
The church needs a massive Bible education program. The church needs to acknowledge that understanding the Bible is more important than memorizing the catechism. If we could get Catholics to read the Sunday scripture readings each week before they come to Mass, it would be revolutionary. If you do not read and pray the scriptures, you are not an adult Christian. Catholics who become evangelicals understand this.
Finally, the Pew data shows that two-thirds of Catholics who become Protestants do so before they reach the age of 24. The church must make a preferential option for teenagers and young adults or it will continue to bleed. Programs and liturgies that cater to their needs must take precedence over the complaints of fuddy-duddies and rubrical purists.
Current religious education programs and teen groups appear to have little effect on keeping these folks Catholic, according to the Pew data, although those who attend a Catholic high school do appear to stay at a higher rate. More research is needed to find out what works and what does not.
The Catholic church is hemorrhaging members. It needs to acknowledge this and do more to understand why. Only if we acknowledge the exodus and understand it will we be in a position to do something about it.
I wonder where all the literalists are on this verse....
OK, then perhaps you could tell us this then. Just why DID Jesus die on the cross if His death wasn't enough to cover all our sins?
If Jesus' death wasn't enough to cover all our sins, then how can creation be liberated from the bondage of corruption that it's under?
Why bother?
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. - Colossians 3:3
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. – John 5:24
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. - Romans 8:9
Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. - Philippians 4:6-7
I see that differently, of course - I see that the reliance upon any religious leadership has inevitably lead to corruption. Every organization that has gained that power (to include your own, IMHO) has failed miserably to refrain from adding on 'traditions', which, btw, is the main thing Yeshua remonstrated (to be kind) the religious leaders of His day about. The governing authority MUST in the end, be the written Word. Every time there has been a 'reset', as it were, the plan has always been 'back to the basics'. Don't you think there might be a reason for that?
The Church teaches that faith is our response to God's call. Responding in faith requires we trust in the authority of God as the cause of our belief. As Blessed John Henry Newman said; “Faith is not a conclusion from premises, but an act of the will following on the conviction that to believe is a duty”. Intellect, education, and reason can assist, but they cannot substitute for faith. We ultimately must choose to believe.
We are not far apart in this - except that the things I must take on faith are a smaller subset, in line with the written Word, and that the authority of YHWH is left with YHWH, where it belongs. And that even when my own will leads me far astray, Yeshua will always come looking for His lost lamb and in spite of my ignorant wandering, He will lead me back to the fold. There are times that He has used His staff to put me on the right path... and even times where He has picked me up and carried me back to where I belong. That is a blessed assurance.
Catholics believe that being born again is not an event as is proclaimed by many Evangelical and Protestant denomination, but for many a life long process we call Conversion. Conversion is not always easy or rapid. It can often includes set backs based upon difficulties and doubts that challenge our faith. It is only when we confront these difficulties and doubts with faith can we progress.
Ahh, it seems that OSAS is the basis of your ire, not the term 'born again'.
Do you suppose that Born Again Christians do not have such setbacks? As a charismatic, perhaps even to another dimension, I have felt nearly abandoned - torn to pieces - and my faith reduced to a guttering pilot light. it is during such times, FRiend, that OSAS has born it's fruit for me, and sustained me against all things perilous.
I do have one thing to cling to as things get dim: That YHWH turns all things to good for those that love Him, and regardless of how it looks, or how it feels, I have a sure promise that I will not be discarded, and that no one can take me out of Yeshua's hand. When all else fails, even my own faith, that has been the single handhold left for me to cling to - And YHWH has always, in His time, turned it around in spite of me and my feeble abilities. And that is a priceless treasure. Praise YHWH! He is faithful and true!
Even when counter to reason, we must reconcile what the experts call cognitive dissonance. Catholicism requires that, in faith, we hold a number of opposing ideas at the same time; God and Man, Mother and Virgin, Sacrament and Sacrifice, Sinner and Saint, death and eternal life, mystery and reason, the secular and the spiritual, faith and understanding, rationalism and fideism, free will and submission. Without Faith these contradictions form an absurdity. For too many these absurdities form an obstacle to conversion remain absurdities until we superimpose Jesus upon them.
Again, for me it has been different: As things prove to be an absurdity (according to the Word), they are readily discarded. There is nothing true except the Word of YHWH, and in that, AS THAT, the promise of Yeshua. All else will pass away, so why bother holding on to it? There is enough conundrum in the pages of the Bible to keep me busy - in awe and fear and trembling - for my whole lifetime. Why bolt on MORE, especially when the 'more' is absurd?
Saint Paul tells us in his epistles that the Cross was seen as a scandal to the Jews and as folly to the Greeks. It was an insult and repulsive to the Romans. [...]
And how is the empty cross of Protestantism viewed, exactly?
Revealed truth is never counter to reason because the authority is God himself who reveals it and He can neither deceive nor be deceived. He is both author and authority. Therefore, Faith is not opposed to reason but is required by reason. Faith is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very Word of God who is Truth. No matter the degree to which Revealed Truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives."
But then, how can those absurdities you were talking about up-post be validated? The Truth has already been revealed.
Thanks for your well thought-out reply.
Interesting isn’t it? I only hear the sound of crickets every time I post that.
I’ll be interested to hear the answer to that one.
Also, what was the point of the resurrection of Christ, stpio? If Christ's death wasn't enough to cover all our sins, how could a righteous and just God raise Him from the dead? If there was just ONE sin that He did not die for then He would still be dead, the wages of sin being death. That IS the point of the resurrection. It is God's proof to us that the debt of our sins have been paid for, by the blood of Christ.
Also, what was the point of the resurrection of Christ, stpio? If Christ's death wasn't enough to cover all our sins, how could a righteous and just God raise Him from the dead? If there was just ONE sin that He did not die for then He would still be dead, the wages of sin being death. That IS the point of the resurrection. It is God's proof to us that the debt of our sins have been paid for, by the blood of Christ.
“OK, then perhaps you could tell us this then. Just why DID Jesus die on the cross if His death wasn’t enough to cover all our sins?
If Jesus’ death wasn’t enough to cover all our sins, then how can creation be liberated from the bondage of corruption that it’s under?”
~ ~ ~
Please, would you clarify as a fallen away Catholic and any
non-Catholic Christians here, what you mean when you profess Jesus’ death covers all our sins.
As a Catholic...
Jesus opened Heaven by His death on the Cross but His suffering death does not cover all our sins in meaning we are saved...justified. Apologist Jimmy Akin states better than I can.
“Jesus died once and for all to pay a price sufficient to cover all the sins of our lives, but God doesn’t apply his forgiveness to us in a once-and-for-all manner. He forgives us as we repent. That’s why we continue to pray “Forgive us our trespasses,” because we regularly have new sins that we have repented of—some venial and some mortal, but all needing forgiveness. -—Excerpt from an article by Jimmy Akin, Catholic Insight, The Limits of Forgiveness.”
If 1/10 of Americans are former Catholics and 1/2 of those that leave become Protestants, then the Protestant Churches must be overflowing with attendees. ????
67“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.
68Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.”
Isaiah 11:2-3 refers to Jesus. His Spirit is the Holy Spirit. That's why those elements of Spirit are upon Him. They are not gifts; they are His own work.
Fear of the Lord is taught. Psalm 34:11 "Come, my children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord." Jesus taught them. Isaiah 53:13, "All your children will be taught by the Lord, and great will be their peace." The things you listed are the resultants of a rational judgment and decision making process. They are not gifts in and of themselves. Being taught what is necesssary to know as input into the rational process does not equate with being given the results.
"St. Paul tells us that although all in the Spirit receive gifts not all receive all of the gifts; "...All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines." - 1 Corinthians 12:7-11
Luke 8:16-18 “No one lights a lamp and hides it in a clay jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, they put it on a stand, so that those who come in can see the light. For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open. Therefore consider carefully how you listen.(remember the prior verses in the Parable of the sower. "Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.") Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what they think they have will be taken from them.” God does not do anyone's thinking for them; nor does He decide which person's thoughts and decisions will be correct.
"So my question remains that if one is not blessed with the gift of knowledge and wisdom to whom should they turn for the correct interpretation of Scripture and how are they to know if the one they are turning to has the gift?
The ability to think is the gift. Whether one puts in the effort to know the facts, or evidence presented, heard, or read, and the effort to understand them depends on that individual's choice, not on any decision God makes. That applies in all cases. Correctness depends on the evidence presented, just as truth stands on the evidence.
Correctness and truth are not determined by the application of non-logical operators such as authority, or democracracy, or any claims of special gifts, powers, or inside info. If one wants to know the truth, they must consider the evidence that's available to anyone, not any extraneous, irrelevant facts, or processes.
No one is, or was ever guaranteed an oracle of truth. Just as God is His own right hand man, so to is any man. That is inherent in the image. Faith is belief in what someone says. In order to have faith, one must consider the evidence and make decisions.
stpio:
And some people, tell them the sun is yellow, they will disagree.
“That’s right. It constantly amazes me how some people will deny clear, PLAINLY STATED TRUTHS OUT OF THE BIBLE and constantly believe teachings which are outright contradicted by Scripture.”
~ ~ ~
Multiple replies with a list of sentences, each one commented on are impossible to respond to, there’s not
enough time and the words of the original poster gets taken
out context. Keep the person’s original post together, paste it. If you like, underline or put in caps what you wish to reply to, then a person’s words stays in context.
Or the only other way, not the best, comment on one statement.
The Bible doesn’t interpret itself. To say one verse means
something is your personal opinion, private judgment, a heresy. Protestants are inconsistent in belief. Which one is professing the true meaning on any verse in Scripture? The world sees the fruit of private judgment,
30,000 plus sects since 1517. There’s even the unaccounted for, “home churches.”
Don’t reject the Truth, God gave the Church the authority
to interpret Scripture.
Romans 8:1-4 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Colossians 1:11-14 11 May you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy, 12 giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. 13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Ephesians 1:11-14 1 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.
Ephesians 2:1-10 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ— by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Galatians 2:20-21 20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.
We are saved NOW. WE are seated in the heavenly places NOW.
We are transferred into the kingdom of the Son He loves NOW. Not hoping to be maybe, but it is a past tense fast.
If you or anyone is depending on works of righteousness to procure salvation then they are going to be condemned. It's only by grace and has always only been by grace.
If we could earn something then it is not grace, undeserved, it is what we deserve. And what we deserve for our works is death.
Romans 4:1-12 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”
9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised.
11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
Jesus death paid the penalty for all our sins. Whether someone chooses to avail themselves of it or not is irrelevant, they are still paid for. We can only appropriate that by faith.
And yes, when we are born again, we are justified, clothed in Christ's righteousness, our sin, ALL our sin, is not counted against us any more. It has been forgiven. ALL of it.
"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For YE ARE DEAD, AND YOUR LIFE IS HID WITH CHRIST IN GOD." Col. 3:3.
We ARE risen with Christ, at the moment of our salvation. We are risen, sealed, and placed into the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit. And we can be CONFIDENT that our past, present, and future are completely secure in the finished work of Christ: "Being confident of this very thing, that HE which hath BEGUN a good work in you WILL PERFORM IT UNTIL THE DAY OF CHRIST." Philippians 1:6.
What part of the following verses do you think are lies?
Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered >b>one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
If you think there is some law that you have to keep or some legal obligation you have to fulfill to either gain or retain salvation you may want to consider the following verse and ponder the consequences of proclaiming Christ’s death as needless.
Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.
“Jesus opened Heaven by His death on the Cross but His suffering death does not cover all our sins in meaning we are saved...justified. Apologist Jimmy Akin states better than I can.”
~ ~ ~
Really, no pasting of Jimmy Akin’s words above to respond to cause they better explain, give proof what you profess is FALSE. OSAS is a lie.
I thought that’s what you meant by Jesus’ death
on the Cross covers all our sins. Thanks for clarifying.
metmom:
“We are saved NOW. WE are seated in the heavenly places NOW.
We are transferred into the kingdom of the Son He loves NOW. Not hoping to be maybe, but it is a past tense fast.”
Amen. God very clearly from the very first said that without the shedding of blood there is NO remission of sins (Leviticus 17:11) and that the "wages" of sin is DEATH (Romans 6:23). But the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Mankind can not pay the penalty for his own sin and expect to make it to heaven because the death God speaks of is eternal separation from him. So, either we pay for our sins by eternally being separated from God in hell, or we accept His gift of grace which is eternal life in heaven with him because our sin debt has been paid in full by the precious blood of Jesus Christ.
No such thing as the word “church” in scripture. It’s “ecclesia” which means "assembly" or "congregation”. God did not give an organization the authority to interpret scripture.
The English word “church” was derived from the Greek word “kyridakon” which wasn’t even used in the Greek during New Testament times and isn’t found anywhere in the New Testament. It didn’t even come into use until around the 16th century. There is no word in the New Testament which can be translated into our understanding of the word “church”. You can find the information in Brown, Colin. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979.
The “ekklesia” spoken of in the New Testament is always tied to a location. Paul writes of the ekklesia te ouse en Korintho, the church which is in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:2), indicating both that it belongs to the people of the place and that it has a new and different quality. This is also true when he speaks of the ekklesia Thessalonikeon (1 Thess.1:1:).
There is no scriptural authority for an organizational structure or ruling body on earth for the “body of Christ”. The RCC is unscriptural in it’s usurpation of Christ’s authority over His people.
Oh what peace, joy and comfort knowing that our future is secure in Christ!!
Amen to your amen, boatbums. It truly goes back to the beginning. Why do you think, stpio, that God accepted Abel’s offering and rejected Cain’s? It’s about the blood. And the work of another’s hands to obtain favor with God.
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.