Denominations that teach that salvation is exclusive to them

[boughtwithaprice]

Do you have scripture that says Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church? We are known by our fruits, and the Church Christ found is a remnant according to the scripture which is a small remainder of the original that keep God’s commandments. Revelation 12:17, Revelation 14:12

The apostles were commanded to teach everything Jesus commanded and observed. Matthew 28:20. Jesus taught on the Ten Commandments John 15:10 John 15:1, Matthew 15:3-9, Matthew 19:17-19, Matthew 5:19-30 and kept the commandments that of course included the Sabbath commandment Luke 4:16 and Jesus is our example to follow 1 John 2:6 which is why the apostles kept the Sabbath decades after Jesus ascended back to heaven Acts 13:42, Acts 13:44, Acts 18:4 and taught on the commandments of God all throughout the NT- just a few example 1 Cor 7:19, James 2:10-12, John 14:15 1 John 2:3-6 Eph 6:2, Romans 7:12


Your own church doesn’t teach this so not sure why you are teaching something different than the church you belong to. The Sabbath is part of God’s Ten Commandments that are eternal. God said not to add or subtract from His commandments Deut 4:2, but the RCC takes credit for changing the commandments not on biblical authority but their own authority which is not above God.

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.



Yes, the Sabbath was made for mankind. Man was created on the 6th day Genesis 1:26 right before the first Sabbath Genesis 2:1-3 celebrated in the presence of God before sin entered. Once sin and sinners are destroyed once and for all, man will once again worship before the Lord every Sabbath Isaiah 66:23 becuase God promised His Sabbath would never end. Exodus 31:16

Jesus said you break the least of these commandments quoting directly from the Ten and teach others to break these commandments, one will be least in heaven. Matthew 5:19-30. The Ten Commandments came in a unit of Ten written by God’s own finger Exodus 31:18, Exodus 34:28 , Exodus 32:16 and if we break one of these commandments we break them all James 2:10-12

The SDA church teaches on all of God’s Ten Commandments.

What Is the Law of God According to the Bible?

God’s law reflects His character, just, loving, and eternal. The Bible shows how His commandments bring freedom and life.

www.adventist.org

You are clearly mistaken. The Sabbath was the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant the Scriptures very clearly show Jesus gave Peter the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, which is ultimate authority. It can’t be more plain, whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven. Whatsoever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven. Even the SDA admits that the authority to change the Sabbath to Sunday came from Rome. That was were Peter was, and he used his God given authority to tell the Church of the New Covenant that we honor Our Lord’s resurrection and the Descent of the Holy Spirit, both of which occurred on the first day of the week, Sunday. We are saved by the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ not by a day of the week
You sound similar to the Judahizers that said that people had to be circumcised to be saved. The Apostles made that clear that it is not the case. Paul even said let no man judge you according to Sabbath days, but you use faulty logic and say that doesn’t apply to the sabbath. Who gave you that authority? Some woman that claims to have had visions after a failed prophesy of the end of the world? Why listen to her and not the Church?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You are clearly mistaken. The Sabbath was the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant the Scriptures very clearly show Jesus gave Peter the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, which is ultimate authority. It can’t be more plain, whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven. Whatsoever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven. Even the SDA admits that the authority to change the Sabbath to Sunday came from Rome.

We admit Rome changed the Sabbath- and the majority followed- but not on the authority of God who said we cannot add or subtract to His commandments Deut 4:2 or change anything to His Word Proverbs 30:5-6 and what we are warned about in scripture Daniel 7:25 No one can or should try to improve on God’s will for us, that He not only personally wrote He personally spoke and placed in our hearts and minds. Exodus 31:18, Exodus 32:16, Exodus 20, Psalms 40:8, Hebrews 8:10-12 which is revealed in heaven Revelation 11:19 and the standard on what we will be judged by. James 2:10-12

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

The disciples even told us we ought to obey God over man. Acts 5:29

That was were Peter was, and he used his God given authority to tell the Church of the New Covenant that we honor Our Lord’s resurrection and the Descent of the Holy Spirit, both of which occurred on the first day of the week, Sunday. We are saved by the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ not by a day of the week

We are not saved by any law-keeping, we are saved by God's grace through our faith. When we have faith in God- we obey what He asks of us because we love Him. Romans 3:31 Revelation 14:12, 1 John 5:3, John 14:15 our obedience to God shows that our heart has been changed by Jesus.

You sound similar to the Judahizers that said that people had to be circumcised to be saved. The Apostles made that clear that it is not the case. Paul even said let no man judge you according to Sabbath days, but you use faulty logic and say that doesn’t apply to the sabbath. Who gave you that authority?

No one gave anyone authority; the Authority is all God and He identifies His commandments right in the Ten Exodus 20:6 and reminded us we cannot add or subtract from them Deut 4:2 or any of His Word Proverbs 30:5-6

Some woman that claims to have had visions after a failed prophesy of the end of the world?

If you are referring to EGW she was 17 years old in 1844 and it was a Baptist Minister who predicted Jesus would come in 1844, not EGW. The sanctuary he thought scripture was being referred to, was an earthy sanctuary, when in reality it was the heavenly sanctuary.

Why listen to her and not the Church?

God's Church keep God's commandments Revelation 14:12 the unedited version written by God Exodus 20. The Sabbath is eternal- Isaiah 66:23 It is written all throughout God’s Word both in the OT and NT and continues in heaven because in God’s own words He claims it as MY HOLY DAY- Isaiah 58:13 Exodus 20:10 the only day God sanctified and blessed Genesis 2:1-3, Exodus 20:8-11 and the day we are to honor Him. All other days are working days. Exodus 20:9 Jesus told us to obey God’s commandments over the traditions of man, quoting directly from the Ten Commandments Matthew 15:3-9 I am going to stick with God’s Word on this, but we have been granted free will.

Here’s a short interesting video from a former Catholic filmed in Rome that answers if Peter was the first pope.

 

[ozso]

You are clearly mistaken. The Sabbath was the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant the Scriptures very clearly show Jesus gave Peter the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, which is ultimate authority. It can’t be more plain, whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven. Whatsoever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven. Even the SDA admits that the authority to change the Sabbath to Sunday came from Rome. That was were Peter was, and he used his God given authority to tell the Church of the New Covenant that we honor Our Lord’s resurrection and the Descent of the Holy Spirit, both of which occurred on the first day of the week, Sunday. We are saved by the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ not by a day of the week
You sound similar to the Judahizers that said that people had to be circumcised to be saved. The Apostles made that clear that it is not the case. Paul even said let no man judge you according to Sabbath days, but you use faulty logic and say that doesn’t apply to the sabbath. Who gave you that authority? Some woman that claims to have had visions after a failed prophesy of the end of the world? Why listen to her and not the Church?

I'm going to disagree with you a bit. As you say the shabbat is old covenant. So I don't think it was a matter of keeping and changing the old covenant shabbat. I think the early Christians simply decided to assemble together to worship Christ on the day of his resurrection to our salvation.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I'm going to disagree with you a bit. As you say the shabbat is old covenant. So I don't think it was a matter of keeping and changing the old covenant shabbat. I think the early Christians simply decided to assemble together to worship Christ on the day of his resurrection to our salvation.

The apostles gathered everyday but preaching the Word of God every Sabbath continued Acts 13:44, Acts 13:42, Acts 18:2 and Jesus expected His followers to keep the Sabbath long after He ascended back to Heaven. Matthew 24:20 Not one word in scripture thats says the Sabbath was transferred to another day. The Sabbath continues in heaven for worshipping the Lord Isaiah 66:23. This change in God’s holy Sabbath came about after scripture in year 300 but it was predicted it would happen in scripture as a warning, not on the authority of God. Daniel 7:25

 

[Daniel Marsh]

There are some in Inkster and Garden City Michigan. The halmark is closed communion. They tend to think they are the only one saved by keeping the laws.
Those churches are located on Cherry Hill and on Middlebelt road.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I'm going to disagree with you a bit. As you say the shabbat is old covenant. So I don't think it was a matter of keeping and changing the old covenant shabbat. I think the early Christians simply decided to assemble together to worship Christ on the day of his resurrection to our salvation.

History also shows us some worshipped everyday.

 

[concretecamper]

The Church was pretty consistently Biblical for four centuries.

If you meant the Church during the first 4 centuries seemed to follow what the Bible teaches, of course. The Bible is a fruit of the Holy Spirit and The Church.

Then extrabiblical things started to be added

The Bible doesn't claim to contain all truths a Christian is to believe. Why do you claim it for the Bible?

Reading the Epistles especially is pretty much the same as listening to the Church as they are written to the Church by the Apostles to give the Church proper instruction and understanding.

Reading the approved canon of scripture is of course like listening to the Church. But again, the Bible doesn't claim to contain all truths a Christian must believe.

Listen, go ahead with your Bible alone mentality. Just be honest and say that scripture doesn't teach it. Me, I'll listen to what Jesus said and what Paul said (under inspiration of the Holy Spirit)

 

[ozso]

History also shows us some worshipped everyday.

No doubt.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Ummm, because Ellen White said so. It is not much different than the RCC where what the Pope says (ex cathedra) is complete and infallible truth.

Pope John Paul II wrote a few books and pope Benedict wrote several but NOBODY even thinks to consider them infallible. Ellen White’s books have a much higher standing among her clan than these popes had for Catholics.

 

[ozso]

If you meant the Church during the first 4 centuries seemed to follow what the Bible teaches, of course. The Bible is a fruit of the Holy Spirit and The Church.

The Bible doesn't claim to contain all truths a Christian is to believe. Why do you claim it for the Bible?

Reading the approved canon of scripture is of course like listening to the Church. But again, the Bible doesn't claim to contain all truths a Christian must believe.

Listen, go ahead with your Bible alone mentality. Just be honest and say that scripture doesn't teach it. Me, I'll listen to what Jesus said and what Paul said (under inspiration of the Holy Spirit)

How would I know how the Church operated for 4 centuries if I only went with the Bible alone? Obviously the only way to know about Church teachings and practices over the centuries is to read about it outside of the Bible. To read what the early Church Fathers wrote. And the thing is for four centuries no one felt the need to say Sola Scriptura, because the Church wasn't involved in teachings, rituals, practices and rules that went outside of what Jesus said. And what Paul said, in accordance to instructions from the Lord he received while in heaven. And what Peter and John said, in accordance to instructions they received from the Lord when they were with him on Earth.

Jesus himself never wrote down anything. Jesus didn't write down “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John is the one who wrote that down. The New Testament scriptures are what Jesus said to his disciples. Paul tells us that "All Scripture is God-breathed". Now most Christians read what others outside of Scripture wrote. Whether that be Clement, or Polycarp, or John Bunyan, or C.S. Lewis. But all of those authors stay within the perimeters of Scripture. Scripture is the measuring rod used to determine if what they are saying is in accordance to what Jesus taught his Apostles and closest disciples like Luke.

 

[ozso]

Perhaps not by flesh nor blood,

perhaps the same revealed way as Jesus Says,

perhaps the same way Simon barJona knew Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of The Living Creator ?

Is that how you learned what took place in the Church for four centuries?

 

[ozso]

1 Corinthians 2:10-16
But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.

This is Truth

Yes, and you learned that by reading
1 Corinthians 2:10-16 rather than it coming to you through divine revelation. And like the rest of us, the only way you learned or will learn about the early church is by reading about it or watching youtube videos or whatever, rather than it coming to you through divine revelation.

 

[Valletta]

How would I know how the Church operated for 4 centuries if I only went with the Bible alone? Obviously the only way to know about Church teachings and practices over the centuries is to read about it outside of the Bible. To read what the early Church Fathers wrote. And the thing is for four centuries no one felt the need to say Sola Scriptura, because the Church wasn't involved in teachings, rituals, practices and rules that went outside of what Jesus said. And what Paul said, in accordance to instructions from the Lord he received while in heaven. And what Peter and John said, in accordance to instructions they received from the Lord when they were with him on Earth.

Jesus himself never wrote down anything. Jesus didn't write down “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John is the one who wrote that down. The New Testament scriptures are what Jesus said to his disciples. Paul tells us that "All Scripture is God-breathed". Now most Christians read what others outside of Scripture wrote. Whether that be Clement, or Polycarp, or John Bunyan, or C.S. Lewis. But all of those authors stay within the perimeters of Scripture. Scripture is the measuring rod used to determine if what they are saying is correct or not.

This is speculation on your part, obviously you have gone outside of the Bible for your flawed information. There is no historical documentation to support the the notion that Sola Scriptura becamse necessary after four centuries. Sola Scriptura came many many centuries later, the idea was popularized by a couple of Christians who were quite taken by an Arab theologian who taught that authority was from the Quran. What happend around four centuries. Well for one thing the the readings at mass were standardized so that all readings came from the 73 books of the Bible chosen by the Catholic Church. Churches began to be built because Christians were now previously allowed to freely worship rather than in secret. They were not built immediately, Catholics put some thought into what a church should look like. The beautiful icons of the east developed, and slowly some liturgies developed, but the basic core of the mass remained as it was in the first century. And over the centuries we continue to come to a deeper understanding, through prayer and discussion, of God's Word. Now indeed Jesus wrote nothing down that was left for us, no instruction book or a command to compile all of the books into a Bible. Never was the Catholic Church told to drop what was passed down through the Apostles and only go by the books of the Bible. Remember most of the twelve Apostles never wrote anything for us that survived, where is the command to exclude what the majority of the Apostles passed down? The teachings of the Catholic Church aree the measuring rod, all potential books of the Bible had to conform to that teaching else the books were rejected.

 

[ozso]

This is speculation on your part, obviously you have gone outside of the Bible for your flawed information.

Clement, Ignatius, Ploycarp etc are my flawed information? Don't be ridiculous.

There is no historical documentation to support the the notion that Sola Scriptura becamse necessary after four centuries.

I didn't say there was. While I brought up Sola Scriptura because I was being accused of adhering to that, what I meant was the Protestant reformation as whole. In other words a Protestant reformation wouldn't have taken place in the early Church because there wasn't anything to protest over.

Sola Scriptura came many many centuries later, the idea was popularized by a couple of Christians who were quite taken by an Arab theologian who taught that authority was from the Quran.

I'd like to see some citation of that please.

What happend around four centuries. Well for one thing the the readings at mass were standardized so that all readings came from the 73 books of the Bible chosen by the Catholic Church. Churches began to be built because Christians were now previously allowed to freely worship rather than in secret. They were not built immediately, Catholics put some thought into what a church should look like. The beautiful icons of the east developed, and slowly some liturgies developed, but the basic core of the mass remained as it was in the first century. And over the centuries we continue to come to a deeper understanding, through prayer and discussion, of God's Word.

After a few centuries the Church had become firmly established. Then later down the road people in the church started making up certain new unbiblical rituals, practices, doctrines, rules etc.

Now indeed Jesus wrote nothing down that was left for us, no instruction book or a command to compile all of the books into a Bible. Never was the Catholic Church told to drop what was passed down through the Apostles and only go by the books of the Bible. Remember most of the twelve Apostles never wrote anything for us that survived, where is the command to exclude what the majority of the Apostles passed down? The teachings of the Catholic Church aree the measuring rod, all potential books of the Bible had to conform to that teaching else the books were rejected.

Apostles wrote instructional letters to the churches. Paul wrote one to the church in Rome. These latters were copied and distributed to other churches. In addition to that church fathers who were direct students of the apostles instructed the church and they put a lot in writing as well. Their writings were in accordance with the writings of the apostles who instructed them, who were instructed by Jesus.
This all took place and those letters were all copied and distributed, long before the 4th century councils of Hippo and Carthage.

 

[ozso]

It almost seems like the Catholic Church teaches that many copies of the 27 manuscrips of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans etc hadn't already been distributed and read all over the world, well before the 4th century. Like all of the manuscripts which make up the New Testament, were hidden in a vault until certain 4th century counsels went through them and put them together into a single volume.

 

[Valletta]

It almost seems like the Catholic Church teaches that many copies of the 27 manuscrips of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans etc hadn't already been distributed and read all over the world, well before the 4th century. Like all of the manuscripts which make up the New Testament, were hidden in a vault until certain 4th century counsels went through them and put them together into a single volume.

Why would you say such a thing? Bibles did not just appear one day, the prayerful process of the Catholic Church choosing the books of the Bible spanned centuries. A lot of non-Catholics are unfamiliar with the process. Early Catholics eventually incorporated the Gospels and other text as readings at the mass once those books were written. Many texts were indeed in circulation, but there were differences in readings at mass from area to area. So at one point the Catholic Church set out to determine which texts were God-breathed and which were not. The Catholic Church process of choosing the 73 books of the Bible spanned centuries. Saint Athanasius is credited with the first Biblical canon (NT) containing the same books in the same order we use today. The list is contained in his Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter of 367 A.D. This list was approved by Pope Damasus, and formally approved of by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. containing the list.

 

[ozso]

Why would you say such a thing? Bibles did not just appear one day, the prayerful process of the Catholic Church choosing the books of the Bible spanned centuries. A lot of non-Catholics are unfamiliar with the process. Early Catholics eventually incorporated the Gospels and other text as readings at the mass once those books were written. Many texts were indeed in circulation, but there were differences in readings at mass from area to area. So at one point the Catholic Church set out to determine which texts were God-breathed and which were not. The Catholic Church process of choosing the 73 books of the Bible spanned centuries. Saint Athanasius is credited with the first Biblical canon (NT) containing the same books in the same order we use today. The list is contained in his Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter of 367 A.D. This list was approved by Pope Damasus, and formally approved of by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. containing the list.

I'm familiar with that. I already had mentioned the counsels of Hippo and Carthage.

The point is many people all over the world had access to copies of the 27 individual manuscripts not long after they were written. Eventually there were thousands of copies. How much canonization did Paul's letters require hundreds of years after they were written?

The Roman Catholic Church did not create the Bible. They simply edited and compiled manuscripts that had been in circulation for centuries. It's like saying the editors and compliers of a publishing company created the works of William Shakespeare.

I get that the RCC wants to take credit for the existence of the Bible, but that's just simply not accurate.

 

[Valletta]

I'm familiar with that. I already had mentioned the counsels of Hippo and Carthage.

The point is many people all over the world had access to copies of the 27 individual manuscripts not long after they were written. Eventually there were thousands of copies. How much canonization did Paul's letters require hundreds of years after they were written?

The Roman Catholic Church did not create the Bible. They simply edited and compiled manuscripts that had been in circulation for centuries. It's like saying the editors and compliers of a publishing company created the works of William Shakespeare.

I get that the RCC wants to take credit for the existence of the Bible, but that's just simply not accurate.

As I've explained there were copies in the early centuries, where you get the thousands from I don't know. But there were many texts circulating, some ended up in the Bible and some did not. Many of the same texts were read at masses but there were differences from area to area. I also think it's fair to say by what they wrote that particularly some of the writers who addressed a letter to a specific audience would have been astounded that such a letter would end up in a 73 book Bible that would be in use for over 1600 years. Of all of the texts the Catholic Church determined what was God-breathed and what was not in a process that spanned centuries. And it was the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, that decided to put them all together, and chose the order that Protestants use as part of their tradition. No Catholic Church--no Bible. It's not a mater of "credit," it's a matter of history although some people don't want to admit it.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

As I've explained there were copies in the early centuries, where you get the thousands from I don't know. But there were many texts circulating, some ended up in the Bible and some did not. Many of the same texts were read at masses but there were differences from area to area. I think it's fair to say by what they wrote that in particular some of the writers who addressed a letter to a specific audience would have been astounded that such a letter would end up in a 73 book Bible that would be in use for over 1600 years. Of all of the texts the Catholic Church determined what was God-breathed and what was not in a process that spanned centuries. And it was the Catholic Church that decided to put them all together, and chose the order that Protestants use as part of their tradition. No Catholic Church--no Bible. It's not a mater of "credit," it's a matter of history although some people don't want to admit it.

God is in control of His Word. All Glory goes to Him.

I think there has been a lot of history re-written by the CC.

 

[concretecamper]

because the Church wasn't involved in teachings, rituals, practices and rules that went outside of what Jesus said.

Read Acts and what the early Church decided about circumcision. It is not recorded in scripture whether or not Jesus taught whether or not circumcision would be required the gentiles.