A few questions for Protestants

[timothyu]

And yet, her heart was open to God's leading.

No doubt because, being of the House of Israel, she was familiar with everything about their history and was also awaiting a messiah. Jesus was intent on reaching all 12 tribes, not just the Jews. He wanted to reunite the House of Israel and to this day those of Judah still scoff at the concept.

 

[Studyman]

I do not mean to say that all doctrines are acceptable to God. That would not be true. Nor do I mean to count as among God's sheep those who knowingly teach things which are not Biblical.

The example I would give is quite illustrative of what I mean: the Samaritan woman. The woman at the well had been ostracized, not just by the Jews, who would not have allowed a Samaritan anywhere near their Temple, but also by many in her own community. We do not know her full story, but very possibly she was not even attending religious services. And yet, her heart was open to God's leading.

What I mean by saying that there are some of God's people in every church is simply this: honest, sincere believers who are doing their best to live up to the light which they have and know. God's people may not be correct on every point, but God winks at their ignorance. When light (or opportunity for it) comes, however, it is their duty to accept it--and God's true followers will be happy to do so.

Thanks for the explanation. That is what I thought you meant but wanted to be sure.

In Matthew 7, Jesus warns of the judgment when HE returns regarding "Many" who called Him Lord, Lord before they died. These "many" no doubt believed with all their heart and were sincere in their belief that they were true followers of God casting out demons in Christ's Name. And yet Jesus claims HE didn't even know them, and more than that, told them to depart from Him, not because they professed to know Him, but because of their works HE said HE judges every man by.

If God provides men with His Oracles and within them tells men to study them "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness", and men choose to adopt the religions of this world and their religious philosophies and traditions instead, rather than to abide by the Christ's instruction, "But seek ye first the Kingdom of God and HIS Righteousness", is this not "working iniquity"? Even if I believe in my heart and am sincere in my belief that I know God?

It is written in the Testimony, 1 John 2: 3 "And hereby we do know that we know him", So is this not the Spirit of Christ teaching all men how they can know for sure if they are True Followers of God, or deceived? So how can I know, according to the Scriptures?

" if we keep his commandments."

But what if a man rejects this as Truth, even in their sincere belief that they are True followers of God?

A good discussion to have for sure.

 

[discombobulated1]

Actually, the Catholic church was not immediately established. Nor was it the continuation of the apostles when it did establish itself.

This is not so according to my best info and I have studied these things rather in-depth. A lot of people believe as you say, namely that the CC did not exist from the beginning, but there is only ONE Church and of course it existed from the beginning. I keep asking Protestants to show me the church that goes back to the beginning of Christian history and none of them claims that any non-Catholic church does.

The first known records of it being called CAtholic are from the year 107 AD. That does not mean that the CC did not exist before 107 AD, just that history is not always kind to ancient documents and people who care for them are... human.

Just because there were no huge cathedrals back in the day, etc, doesn't mean the CC which now has such buildings did not exist. Jesus said that he would BUILD His Church... (Mt 16:18). The implication is.. more than a mere implication, namely that it was not 100% complete at the time of His departure from Earth... not hardly. He knew better than anyone that humans need TIME to learn about Him and all that His Words were meant to convey to us.

 

[timothyu]

Jesus said that he would BUILD His Church..

He did, and the Way and the Nazarenes followed it

 

[Studyman]

This is not so according to my best info and I have studied these things rather in-depth. A lot of people believe as you say, namely that the CC did not exist from the beginning, but there is only ONE Church and of course it existed from the beginning. I keep asking Protestants to show me the church that goes back to the beginning of Christian history and none of them claims that any non-Catholic church does.

The first known records of it being called CAtholic are from the year 107 AD. That does not mean that the CC did not exist before 107 AD, just that history is not always kind to ancient documents and people who care for them are... human.

Just because there were no huge cathedrals back in the day, etc, doesn't mean the CC which now has such buildings did not exist. Jesus said that he would BUILD His Church... (Mt 16:18). The implication is.. more than a mere implication, namely that it was not 100% complete at the time of His departure from Earth... not hardly. He knew better than anyone that humans need TIME to learn about Him and all that His Words were meant to convey to us.

What can be known for sure, without any question, is that the Jesus "of the Bible" didn't reject the Judgments of God and create HIS Own, nor did HE instruct His People to do so. He didn't reject God's Sabbath and create His own, nor did HE instruct others to do so. He didn't reject the Statutes of God and create His own high days, nor did HE instruct others to do so. He didn't create images of His Father after the likeness of man, and never instructed His people to do so. He didn't create a religious business or instruct His People to build manmade shrines of worship, with men who "Transform themselves" into apostles of Christ who sit in the Chief seats of these manmade temples. And HE never instructed even ONE person to behave in such a manner. Truly Jesus never rejected His Father's commandments so that HE could keep HIS OWN Traditions, and HE would never instruct others to do so. And truly the first Church of God under the New Priest "After the Order of Melchizedek" didn't engage in or partake of any of these iniquities. These things are undeniable Biblical Truths that are found in the Holy scriptures for all to read.

The rebellious Jews and their disobedient religious sects like the Pharisees and Sadducees did many of these things and were rejected by God for doing so. The Catholic church and her many protestant daughters engage in all of these works. This is all undeniable truth.

Does it matter? That is the question isn't it?

And the Jesus "of the Bible" warned us not to be deceived, not by Islam or Atheists or Buddhism, but specifically by a "MANY" who HE said "shall" come in His Name, who call HIM, the Christ.

Matt. 24: 4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many "shall" come in my name, saying, I (Jesus) am Christ; and "shall" deceive many.

This same Jesus also warns;

Matt. 7: 22 Many "will" say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Paul also warns of men who were already claiming to be like him and Peter.

2 Cor. 11: 12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion "from them" which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. 13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, "transforming themselves" into the apostles of Christ.

Paul also warns Titus about men who profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

So I get loyalty to family and religious tradition and all. But when a man really listens to the Jesus "of the Bible", and then looks around him at all the religions and their differing philosophies and doctrines and marketing strategies as they compete with one another for butts to fill the seats of their manmade shrines of worship, it become clear why Jesus gave us these warnings in the first place.

Matt. 10: 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Great topic, although possibly uncomfortable for some.

 

[timothyu]

And truly the first Church of God under the New Priest "After the Order of Melchizedek" didn't engage in or partake of any of these iniquities.

So anybody who lays claim to this lineage would have had to change something to be what it is today??

 

[Studyman]

So anybody who lays claim to this lineage would have had to change something to be what it is today??

I'm not sure that "ADD" something would be an accurate description according to what is actually written in the Holy Scriptures. In Paul's own Words here is what he taught both Jew and Gentile.

Acts 26: 19 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: 20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance. 21 For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me.

Here are the Words of the Jesus of the Bible regarding the Mainstream God of Abraham preachers of His Time.

Mark 7: 9 And he said unto them, Full well "ye reject" the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Here is what the Same Christ declared before HE became a man, when HE was "up where HE was before".

Ez. 20: 19 I am the LORD your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them; 20 And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God.

21 Notwithstanding the children rebelled against me: they walked not in my statutes, neither kept my judgments to do them, which if a man do, he shall even live in them; they polluted my sabbaths: then I said, I would pour out my fury upon them, to accomplish my anger against them in the wilderness.

So it seems the warnings of the Christ and His Disciples were true. And "many" want eternity, and want the Gift of God, and want, want, want. But they "Reject" the Path God before ordained that they should walk in. This they did first, and afterwards they went about to establish their own righteousness which would precipitate the "change" you referenced. At least this is my understanding.

 

[WilliamC]

This is not so according to my best info and I have studied these things rather in-depth.

As we all should who seek real truth. It is ever continuous.

A lot of people believe as you say, namely that the CC did not exist from the beginning, but there is only ONE Church and of course it existed from the beginning.

Actually, we see in Acts 20:30, a breakaway (false church) from the real church, promoting contrary doctrines and drawing away disciples from the real church. John spoke of it as well. I John 2:18,19. Paul also lightly touched on it in II Thess.2:2-4. We need to examine the Scripture's, the Word(s) of Christ, and the early teachings of the disciples to see what could possibly be contrary.

I keep asking Protestants to show me the church that goes back to the beginning of Christian history and none of them claims that any non-Catholic church does.

I wouldn't put too much stock in being sure one Is necessarily the real church by it's longevity. The little horn power in Daniel reigns for a time, times, and a dividing of time (1260 yrs.). And the beast from the sea in Revelation was to reign for 42 months (1260 yrs.) until it receives a wound (1798 a.d.), which would be healed (Mussolini 1940's). After Imp. Rome...the Restrainer, comes the RCC 538ad till 1798ad when she receives a deadly wound by General Berthier. She was restored (healed)to power by Mussolini. and continues today, till the end.
Besides, God woman (the true church) went into hiding for 1260 yrs. (12:14).
It's not a list of successors that determines if its God's true church, it the truth's the Scriptures speak about (gospel)that's important.

The first known records of it being called CAtholic are from the year 107 AD. That does not mean that the CC did not exist before 107 AD, just that history is not always kind to ancient documents and people who care for them are... human.

I wouldn't count on Ignatius as a reliable source. His supposed writings are highly disputed, being labeled antedated forgeries and interpolated throughout. The RCC doesn't deny it has used such strategies to maintain its power, when found out.

Just because there were no huge cathedrals back in the day, etc, doesn't mean the CC which now has such buildings did not exist.

No one disputes there was a roman church, but the embellishments that prop it up as the ONLY are called into question.

Jesus said that he would BUILD His Church... (Mt 16:18). The implication is.. more than a mere implication, namely that it was not 100% complete at the time of His departure from Earth... not hardly.

Every believer (ecclesia) along the way, from Pentecost forward, are His church His building. They were, and are added daily, being built up.

He knew better than anyone that humans need TIME to learn about Him and all that His Words were meant to convey to us.

Of course he did. The delivering of the gospel was a tedious task. But it was being published throughout. (Acts 6:7a; 10:37; 12:24; 13:49; 19:20). Blessings!

 

[Studyman]

As we all should who seek real truth. It is ever continuous.

Actually, we see in Acts 20:30, a breakaway (false church) from the real church, promoting contrary doctrines and drawing away disciples from the real church. John spoke of it as well. I John 2:18,19. Paul also lightly touched on it in II Thess.2:2-4. We need to examine the Scripture's, the Word(s) of Christ, and the early teachings of the disciples to see what could possibly be contrary.

I wouldn't put too much stock in being sure one Is necessarily the real church by it's longevity. The little horn power in Daniel reigns for a time, times, and a dividing of time (1260 yrs.). And the beast from the sea in Revelation was to reign for 42 months (1260 yrs.) until it receives a wound (1798 a.d.), which would be healed (Mussolini 1940's). After Imp. Rome...the Restrainer, comes the RCC 538ad till 1798ad when she receives a deadly wound by General Berthier. She was restored (healed)to power by Mussolini. and continues today, till the end.
Besides, God woman (the true church) went into hiding for 1260 yrs. (12:14).
It's not a list of successors that determines if its God's true church, it the truth's the Scriptures speak about (gospel)that's important.

I wouldn't count on Ignatius as a reliable source. His supposed writings are highly disputed, being labeled antedated forgeries and interpolated throughout. The RCC doesn't deny it has used such strategies to maintain its power, when found out.

No one disputes there was a roman church, but the embellishments that prop it up as the ONLY are called into question.

Every believer (ecclesia) along the way, from Pentecost forward, are His church His building. They were, and are added daily, being built up.

Of course he did. The delivering of the gospel was a tedious task. But it was being published throughout. (Acts 6:7a; 10:37; 12:24; 13:49; 19:20). Blessings!

Great post, lots of truisms. I would speak to last sentence though and perhaps I am not understanding what you mean. Wasn't the Gospel of Christ also shown to Israel during the Exodus? Wasn't it the Christ who fed and watered Israel before HE became a man and dwelt among us? Didn't Isaiah preach the "Good News" of the Gospel?

Is. 48: 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. 17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.

So Israel was given the same Gospel by the same Christ, Yes? But they rejected it. Not Caleb, or Joshua, but "many" of them fell in the wilderness.

Duet. 32: 18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. 19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters. 20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

And Hebrews 4 recounts this truth for us.

Heb.4: 1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

I see this teaching confirmed by Zacharias, Simeon, Anna (Luke 1&2) and the Wise men, who knew the Christ, and His Gospel before HE became a man and dwelt among us, who having heard the Gospel, mixed the hearing with Faith/belief. I would say they are members of the Body of Christ as well.

So the Church in Acts was just a continuance of God's Church, only under the New, incorruptible Priesthood Covenant as Prophesied, based on better promises. "A more Excellent Ministry" than the Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron".

Certainly, a different Priesthood than was and still is promoted by the RCC.

 

[timothyu]

I'm not sure that "ADD" something would be an accurate description

I was referring more to having rejected something in order to work with the governments of man rather than maintain being a separate entity, a true alternate choice.

 

[timothyu]

So it seems the warnings of the Christ and His Disciples were true. And "many" want eternity, and want the Gift of God, and want, want, want. But they "Reject" the Path God before ordained that they should walk in. This they did first, and afterwards they went about to establish their own righteousness which would precipitate the "change" you referenced. At least this is my understanding.

Yes, yet truth remains in scripture

 

[Studyman]

Yes, yet truth remains in scripture

Yes, it is my understanding also that the Armor of God is the way to withstand this world's religious influences, should a man trust God enough to "put it on". Which of course, includes the Sword of the Lord, the Word of God.

I am in 100% agreement with you regarding the Truth which remains in scripture.

 

[timothyu]

John 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

1 John 2:
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

 

[Studyman]

John 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

1 John 2:
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

Amen.

1 John 5: 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

 

[rturner76]

Actually, the Catholic church was not immediately established.

The Catholic Church WAS immediately established. Before Christianity, most religions were based on ethnic foundations as in Greek Gods, the Roman Army's worship of Mithras, Zoroastrians from Persia, etc.

Well, the Church that Jesus founded and passed to St Peter was the first "universal" religion. Meaning, anyone from any walk of life could become Christian. That is how the Catholic (meaning universal) Church started in Jerusalem first to the Jews. It then was made available to the Gentiles of Greece and Rome among other countries like Ethiopia.

It is commonly accepted by factions of the Protestant Churches that the Catholic Church was not the first Church however, they were most;y on a mission to discredit the Church. It is well known that the Bishops of the Catholic Church settled on what books the New Testament were to be considered the inspired word of God. Then Protestants (certain ones) then use that same Bible as they see fit in their own traditions and interpretations to challenge the very Church that brought them an infallible Bible.

It's politics. Christ founded The Church, he passed the keys to St Peter (our first Pope) who would then found the Church of Rome which would Christianize all of Western Europe, South America, and Africa. The Church is the Church. Protestants (protesters) all have their own way of interpreting the New Testament. That is why it seems that all of the Bible verses that teach repentance and obedience are ignored for what is essentially Universal Salvation

 

[timothyu]

Here I thought the true church was the one founded at Caesarea built upon truth only from God, truth that had always been available to all mankind, yet mankind preferred their own twisted truths that served their own purposes. They always somehow end up making everything about themselves and that too is universal. Jesu did not start a new religion but revived an old truth that even His religion of the day had twisted to serve themselves. Jesus' church stood out against all others because it did not serve the will of man nor did it comply..

 

[Carl Emerson]

In Revelation God indicated that a church could loose the 'lampstand'...

How can we be sure that any church today has this in place, given that all seem to have strayed from the first love that was recorded in the first 5 chapters of Acts.

 

[discombobulated1]

The rebellious Jews and their disobedient religious sects like the Pharisees and Sadducees did many of these things and were rejected by God for doing so. The Catholic church and her many protestant daughters engage in all of these works. This is all undeniable truth.

I read this far and have a resounding NO in response.

I have read the Old and the New Testaments both and in the Old, the Jews (and Jesus was one of them) were instructed by God to build the tabernacle (Ark of the Covenant) and adorn it with images of cherubim (heavenly beings) and oxen (earthly ones) made of gold and brass.

It is when one worships the image itself.. instead of worshiping God that is the problem. But who in his right mind would worship the image of an ox like the story we hear in the Old T... about how Moses caught the people worshiping the fake calf and threw down the 10 Commandment tablets in anger..? I never did understand that... worshiping a fake calf... or even a real one! Some day I will ask a Catholic priest about that one because it baffles me.

In any case, Moses was one of the first, if not the first, to talk to God face to face like he would talk to a human being. Maybe the people just didn't know what that was like? Still.. a calf! Weird...

In any case, the point is that not all images were prohibited. The protestants are big on accusing Catholics of worshiping images of Mary and other saints because most Protestants (in my experience) have not read a fraction of the Old Testament. Mostly, they focus on the New, which I myself did when I first had a big experience with Jesus. I didn't understand the parts of the Old T I tried to read, but that was many moons ago and I have since read the whole Bible (best version available, which is the non-interpretive Douay Rheims)

 

[discombobulated1]

In Revelation God indicated that a church could loose the 'lampstand'...

How can we be sure that any church today has this in place, given that all seem to have strayed from the first love that was recorded in the first 5 chapters of Acts.

A good question. At one time a few years ago, I would have wondered about the Catholic Church losing its lampstand, but I do not wonder about that anymore. That's because the Real Presence of Christ is still there in at least some --maybe all (to some extent?) CCs. I know because I have been experiencing the RP for many years now, despite a heretic being at the helm. Jesus promised He would never leave us .. Mt 28:20 and other psgs. He also said that His Church would prevail over the very gates of Hell... (Mt 16:18) --very important because Satan is more powerful than human beings. We absolutely need this Church that can conquer that so and so

 

[discombobulated1]

Here I thought the true church was the one founded at Caesarea built upon truth only from God, truth that had always been available to all mankind, yet mankind preferred their own twisted truths that served their own purposes. They always somehow end up making everything about themselves and that too is universal. Jesu did not start a new religion but revived an old truth that even His religion of the day had twisted to serve themselves. Jesus' church stood out against all others because it did not serve the will of man nor did it comply..

Religion gets a bad name, but it is a good word that simply means a belief system centered on God. It is true that if you approach God only through some man-made religious system and not the way HE wants you to, you will have problems. That is why the Ancient Church kept the old rituals of the Jews (not all, of course.. no animal sacrifice), only altering a thing or 2 here and there. Jesus changed afew things but not as much as a lot of Christians think.. And I have learned the hard way that one must worship God the way HE wants or.. there are big problems.