Error of Christanity...

[CharismaticLady]

Now your story is changing. Before this, your claim was that genuine faith came from immersing oneself in Sacred Scripture. Now, seemingly, your claim is that faith springs from repentance.

I don't know what you think I said. Knowing scripture is not enough without becoming a Christian. You can't become a Christian without receiving the Holy Spirit. And you can't receive the Holy Spirit without repentance. I said nothing about faith. Faith comes by a rhema of God.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I'm not aware of any church which claims one has to make a private confession, only that private confession is available because Christ gave it to the Church as an instrument of grace. One is not "more forgiven" by confessing to a pastor than by confessing by oneself or as part of the public confession of sins in worship

This is simply not accurate with respect to the Catholic Church. What you write may hold true for other communities. I wouldn't know. But it is not true of Catholicism.

1457 ... Anyone who is aware of having committed a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution...

Sacramental absolution. That can only be obtained in Confession.

That was really helpful. I guess it one of those “to each’s own”... I thought this was a requirement in the Catholic Church but I see I am wrong. Thank you

John 20:23 means something. Historically, the Church has interpreted that passage to mean that she has the authority to pronounce forgiveness or retention on sins. Indeed, this doctrine went unchallenged for centuries.

Frankly, I think the onus is on Protestants to explain why they reject a practice with such a lengthy history.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Yet everyone claims to have the spirit and comes up with different ideas, it's all chaos. There must be something better than rampant individualism gone amok

But what else is there besides each individual trying to figure it out as an individual? It can be hard to ask people to put there thoughts and beliefs about God in the hands of another person or group. I realize a lot of people people do it and that’s completely fine but we can’t expect everybody will be comfortable just following along and hoping the people they are learning from are right.

 

[charsan]

If I didn't know better, I just might think that private interpretation of Sacred Scripture has done far more to divide Christians from each other than it has to unify them. A very strange situation, I must say...

This has done great damage and continues to do damage

 

[charsan]

But what else is there besides each individual trying to figure it out as an individual? It can be hard to ask people to put there thoughts and beliefs about God in the hands of another person or group. I realize a lot of people people do it and that’s completely fine but we can’t expect everybody will be comfortable just following along and hoping the people they are learning from are right.

You'll never find Jesus saying to find out alone and you'll never find that idea in the Bible anywhere. It was the Church that figured things out in the Bible and the early centuries and than when Luther came along all of a sudden everyone could figure out things for themselves. If one is a believer in Christ then they just follow along with Christ, Christ founded a Church not just people running around saying this is how to believe with different ideas. Even in the NT people did not figure things out by themselves but the Church held a council and as Christ had St. Paul put in the Bible "the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth" not the individual person.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

This is simply not accurate with respect to the Catholic Church. What you write may hold true for other communities. I wouldn't know. But it is not true of Catholicism.

Sacramental absolution. That can only be obtained in Confession.

John 20:23 means something. Historically, the Church has interpreted that passage to mean that she has the authority to pronounce forgiveness or retention on sins. Indeed, this doctrine went unchallenged for centuries.

Frankly, I think the onus is on Protestants to explain why they reject a practice with such a lengthy history.

Lengthy history in my opinion is never a good enough reason to not challenge something. I’m not saying your wrong I’m just saying everything should be challenged unless there is 100% certainty. Through challenging someone can maybe become comfortable accepting an idea or belief but it can’t be just because said interpretation, belief or idea went unchallenged for so long so I will just accept it.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Lengthy history in my opinion is never a good enough reason to not challenge something.

In this particular case, the practice goes back to people who were personally taught and instructed in the faith by the apostles.

So I'm rather curious what makes anybody think they know better than the ancients when it comes to this.

I’m not saying your wrong I’m just saying everything should be challenged unless there is 100% certainty. Through challenging someone can maybe become comfortable accepting an idea or belief but it can’t be just because said interpretation, belief or idea went unchallenged for so long so I will just accept it.

This is a peculiarly American attitude. I sometimes get the idea that a certain type of American Protestant sincerely believes they're the first person in all of history to question a given idea or doctrine.

In practice, this tendency has had the unfortunate effect of the Christian faith being continuously pared down. Today's "reformed" Christians reject ideas and beliefs which the original "reformers" considered sacrosanct. My theory is that in one century or less, certain parts of Protestant Christianity won't even be recognizable as Christianity anymore.

 

[Jen35]

Look I'm sorry ok. And even though yall made me feel bad but I do apologise you guys but please consider what I said and don't fall into such deception...bye :-/

 

[Willie T]

I am reminded of the old joke: "If the KJV was good enough for Paul and Jesus, it's good enough for me."

I think we honestly ignore the fact that these "ancients" were Jews who were raised from childhood as Jews, and very likely mixed a lot of their inbred native "religion" into at least SOME of their teachings. Even Apollos had to have some of his teachings straightened out by Priscilla and Aquila. (Were those two perfect? After all, they weren't Apostles) And Paul, himself, called out Peter for falling back into his old "religious" ways when some Jerusalem Hot-Shots showed up at their assembly. And the whole Galatians congregation seems to have been mixing their religion in with what they were taught.

This (and more) was all happening while the Apostles were still right there with them. What makes us so dogmatically defiant that we insist that all those people, hundreds of years after the Apostles died, got it right when they pooled together and "officially" made a church organization? Rules laid down, by the way, that have been changed and altered many times since then, down through history... even during the past few decades.

"Well, not 'serious' rules", we say. I submit that if any of the rules were enough in error to have to be changed, then that calls the validity of ALL the rules into question.

And then came the Protestants who we say HAVE to be wrong because they do not necessarily follow the "ancient rules passed down through Apostolic Succession."

I think we might need to do some soul searching about just what it is (or should I say, "who" it is) that we may not have been really following.

 

[Mathetes66]

"Actually not all branches of Christianity agree even on historic doctrines. At the moment there are over 40,000 Christian branches, churches, denominations."

This number keeps GOING UP without any basis for it's accuracy.

Here is an article in 2016 from the National Catholic Register by Scott Eric Alt that debunks this myth & is a good analysis of coming close to the actual number. At the time he wrote it, the mythical number was 33,000. The mythical legend continues to grow apparently.

 

[Mathetes66]

"Wow! I'd hate to see a post you weren't "making in love." LOL"

Apparently you don't think what I wrote was done in love. But even sadder is that you laugh about it. I am open to correction by anyone. If you have a better way of addressing this issue of false teaching concerning the Holy Spirit, please enlighten & instruct me.

There is abundant evidence from the early church fathers who actively dealt with heretical, false teaching concerning the doctrine of the Trinity & WHY the church councils were convened & their creeds were made concerning this issue.

You should read some of their responses to this false teaching. I am very mild compared to what some of them wrote or some of the canons that repeat the word ANATHEMA to those who believed & taught contrary to it.

 

[Blade]

"long suffering" "Patience, endurance, steadfastness and forbearance" This is something that is of God comes from God. Some don't practice this when talking with others when they disagree

This does apply here. Then again.. do we look at our selfs and wonder is it me not them?

 

[Ken Rank]

I’m curious how that works. Both people have the Holy Spirit leading them on specific issue and come to different conclusions? How does this work?

If this is true then why all of the arguing and debating you think? If it’s clear that it’s possible for someone to be wrong in their opinion or interpretation why are people so rude on the forums then?

In an odd way, this is related.

When we receive the Holy Spirit, we are not perfected at that time. Paul calls the very giving of the Holy Spirit an "earnest" or a "down payment." It's like getting 10% now and the rest when messiah returns. The 10% (or whatever amount it is) isn't given to make us infallible, we aren't made God because we have a measure of the Holy Spirit in us... we simply have an aid, a comforter, a teacher, a guide. And how we use that is up to how in tune we are with God. The closer we draw, the better we hear Him, the stronger the influence.

But... we don't cease being fallen humans at this time... that is a work that takes place when Messiah returns. So, we will make error, and get mad from time to time... but hopefully there are greater amounts of time in-between moments like that as we grow because, over time, we draw closer and closer to God. Remember, we are likened to babies in need of milk when we first come to the Lord, and as we grow and some time passes, we switch off the more solid food and eventually meat. Yet... we have that Spirit even when on milk and knowing nothing at all.

 

[Ken Rank]

How does this work?

Let me ask you something.... you list as being 28, can I assume you have been a Christian for at least a few years? You should still get this even if not.

Has your understanding increased and grown since you came to the Lord, or is it exactly as it was the day you said that little prayer? Do you expect to know more, draw closer, and have more wisdom in say 5 years... or is what you currently know now all that you expect to have?

The answers should be obvious... so much so that you should be able to see that you might not even agree with some things you believed early on and yet you still had the Spirit from the moment you turned in your heart to God. How does that work? It just means that the Spirit isn't given to make us infallible... it is given for reasons I shared in my last post and as an earnest toward something greater we await... when we are perfected, made incorruptible, changed.

Blessings.
Ken

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

In this particular case, the practice goes back to people who were personally taught and instructed in the faith by the apostles.

So I'm rather curious what makes anybody think they know better than the ancients when it comes to this.

This is a peculiarly American attitude. I sometimes get the idea that a certain type of American Protestant sincerely believes they're the first person in all of history to question a given idea or doctrine.

In practice, this tendency has had the unfortunate effect of the Christian faith being continuously pared down. Today's "reformed" Christians reject ideas and beliefs which the original "reformers" considered sacrosanct. My theory is that in one century or less, certain parts of Protestant Christianity won't even be recognizable as Christianity anymore.

Maybe so, maybe not. I personally wouldn’t know but I can’t see why it would be wrong to ask questions. And when the answers given are merely the opinions of a person or even that of the larger group as a whole it’s still ok to leave room for the possibility that there is some misinformation or possibly just flat out wrong.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

You'll never find Jesus saying to find out alone and you'll never find that idea in the Bible anywhere. It was the Church that figured things out in the Bible and the early centuries and than when Luther came along all of a sudden everyone could figure out things for themselves. If one is a believer in Christ then they just follow along with Christ, Christ founded a Church not just people running around saying this is how to believe with different ideas. Even in the NT people did not figure things out by themselves but the Church held a council and as Christ had St. Paul put in the Bible "the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth" not the individual person.

But isn’t wise to consider what if the church or group is wrong? Unless there is certainty. Not certainty in what the church or group believed but certainty that what they believed or interpreted was actually the truth. I don’t see the harm in asking some questions and then deciding do I trust what is being said or not.

 

[charsan]

But isn’t wise to consider what if the church or group is wrong? Unless there is certainty. Not certainty in what the church or group believed but certainty that what they believed or interpreted was actually the truth. I don’t see the harm in asking some questions and then deciding do I trust what is being said or not.

Well Christ said the pillar and foundation of truth is the Church. I know to us Americans we must do things for ourselves but God wanted us to trust the Church not ourselves. Now there are times people in the Church could be wrong but the Church overall would never be. Christ said the gates of hell would never prevail against the Church, he never mentioned us.

 

[JackRT]

But isn’t wise to consider what if the church or group is wrong? Unless there is certainty. Not certainty in what the church or group believed but certainty that what they believed or interpreted was actually the truth. I don’t see the harm in asking some questions and then deciding do I trust what is being said or not.

The asking of questions is never wrong and is in fact wise.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Well Christ said the pillar and foundation of truth is the Church. I know to us Americans we must do things for ourselves but God wanted us to trust the Church not ourselves. Now there are times people in the Church could be wrong but the Church overall would never be. Christ said the gates of hell would never prevail against the Church, he never mentioned us.

I realize we are all different. And I think if that works for you then that’s awesome! And I realize it’s possible I could be wrong in my approach, but I will always ask questions of any human being. I have seen what we are capable of even in large groups and I cannot trust humans 100% with the truth about God. It doesn’t mean I won’t choose to believe humans at times, all I’m saying is I will leave room for the possibility that infallible humans showed their infallibility. I do appreciate our conversation also. Thank you!

 

[JackRT]

loversofjesus

We Christians cannot say "Believe us without question" and then say "It is unquestionable that all other faith claims are false".

Christianity must stnd or fall on the same standards that we impose on others.