Standing Up
On and on
That's not true (the bolded part). Haven't you read the Gospel or know subsequent church history
But it's not a Protestant error, but a continuation of Rome's error.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month between the two evenings is the LORD's Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD; seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days; in the seventh day is a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. (Leviticus 23:5)
The biblical regulations for the observance of the festival require that all leavening be disposed of before the beginning of the 15th of Nisan. An unblemished lamb or goat, known as the Paschal Lamb, is to be set apart on Nisan 10, and slaughtered at dusk as Nisan 14 ends in preparation for the 15th of Nisan when it will be eaten after being roasted. The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "between the two evenings". It is then to be eaten "that night", Nisan 15, roasted, without the removal of its internal organs with unleavened bread, known as matzo, and bitter herbs known as maror. Nothing of the sacrifice on which the sun rises by the morning of the 15th of Nisan may be eaten, but must be burned. The sacrifices may only be performed in a specific place prescribed by God (for Judaism, Jerusalem, and for Samaritans, Mount Gerizim)..
From Exodus 12, 16, and Deuteronomy 16. This is how it was celebrated until the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
And you folks don't think Catholics read or know the Bible...
Were they baptisms "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?" If so, they were valid baptisms. If not, not. Because an atheist can perform a baptism, as long as he uses water and the formula, and intends it the way the Church means it.
No, when I peer into the pages of New Testament I see the fullness of the Catholic Church revealed, complete with it's three-fold ministry. It was with us then, and it's with us now. I'm not sure how the SDA works, but I know that within protestantism there exists a two-fold ministry and a five-fold ministry. Then of course you have the emergent church and the remnant church as well as the house church movements who, to me, are the most guilty of trying to recreate the Church in their own image.
I also know the promise of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church. So, where do protestants get this idea that they need to reinstate the Church?
The practice of Rome was not to rebaptize certain heretics coming into the Catholic Church; on the other hand the practice of North African Churches was not consistent (i.e., some did, and some didn't). A certain bishop from Numidia (a North African province) asked St. Cyprian's advice on the fact that bishops in Mauretania (another North African province) did not rebaptize Novatians coming into the Catholic Church. St. Cyprian replied that Novatians need to be rebaptized, classing them with other well-known heresies such as the Montanists who were known to be rebaptized. Further, St. Cyprian assumed that the bishops were free to decide on the practice. The letter was circulated and reached Rome. Thereupon, Pope St. Stephen replied that it was not proper to rebaptize heretics who baptized according to the Faith given by Jesus Christ (i.e., "In Jesus' name") and used the correct formula (i.e., "in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"); Pope Stephen further threatened excommunication on those who did not adhere to the same standard. St. Cyprian replied that Pope St. Stephen was wrong.Obviously they weren't, but Rome insisted they were valid nonetheless. Read about it. Here's some starters for you.
ANF05. Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian, Appendix - Christian Classics Ethereal Library
ANF05. Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian, Appendix - Christian Classics Ethereal Library
No, when I peer into the pages of New Testament I see the fullness of the Catholic Church revealed, complete with it's three-fold ministry. It was with us then, and it's with us now.Can you be specific using the pages of the N.T?
>> I'm not sure how the SDA works, but I know that within protestantism there exists a two-fold ministry and a five-fold ministry. Then of course you have the emergent church and the remnant church as well as the house church movements who, to me, are the most guilty of trying to recreate the Church in their own image.<<
Some of the first early churches met in homes. What is your objecion to that type of church? Again, be specific with Bib le verses.
>>I also know the promise of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church. So, where do protestants get this idea that they need to reinstate the Church?
What maks you think Protestants are trying to restate the church? There is no need to. The Bible does not specify a specific type of church.
Do you understand the term "the invisible church?"
kermit
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month between the two evenings is the LORD's Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD; seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days; in the seventh day is a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. (Leviticus 23:5)
The biblical regulations for the observance of the festival require that all leavening be disposed of before the beginning of the 15th of Nisan. An unblemished lamb or goat, known as the Paschal Lamb, is to be set apart on Nisan 10, and slaughtered at dusk as Nisan 14 ends in preparation for the 15th of Nisan when it will be eaten after being roasted. The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "between the two evenings". It is then to be eaten "that night", Nisan 15, roasted, without the removal of its internal organs with unleavened bread, known as matzo, and bitter herbs known as maror. Nothing of the sacrifice on which the sun rises by the morning of the 15th of Nisan may be eaten, but must be burned. The sacrifices may only be performed in a specific place prescribed by God (for Judaism, Jerusalem, and for Samaritans, Mount Gerizim)..
From Exodus 12, 16, and Deuteronomy 16. This is how it was celebrated until the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
And you folks don't think Catholics read or know the Bible...
Well, it's impossible for the Church Christ founded to become corrupt. It's possible for people to corrupt an organization, but the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, so will not be corrupted. Now, then, or ever.
I guess I need to go back to the beginning of this thread, which I will do, but I will say the all of what bbbbbb said is wrong. The church became corrupt under the Catholics and the reformtion tried to bring it back to it roots.
The goal of the reformation ws not to recreate the church to its own understanding. It was to try and bring it back to a Bible based and only the Bible as it guide for church doctrines.
kermit
It looked to me like you and bbbbbbb have been saying the same thing, although you both chose your particular wording in hopes of being correctly understood by the reader.
It's a truthful description of the meaning and derivation of words in the English language. It has little to say and intends to teach nothing whatever about the 'evolution' of church organisation. It is hard to understand how one could so misread it. The bold in the quote above is completely irrelevant to the content of the quote in red text.
Any Catholic who goes to Mass on a weekly basis and listens hears the 70% of the Bible in a 3 year timespan. Those who attend daily Mass as well hear 85% in 2 years. Those who pray the Divine Office, admittedly a small number, get 100% in two years. Then there's those of us who read Scripture every day, and supplement it with ECF writings, which is what Sacred Tradition is all about.Most I have known do not. Most know the traditions of the church more than they know the Bible. Of coures there are excceptions and you seem to be one of them.
kermit
Which promise? That the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit?
John 14:16 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would be with the Church forever. The Spirit prevents the teaching of error on faith and morals. It is guaranteed because the guarantee comes from God Himself who cannot lie.Only if the person listens to the Holy Spirit and what he hears must be from the Bible, not freom man. Even withing the Catholic church there has been some disagreements, so how do you account for that?
John 14:26 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would teach the Church (the apostles and successors) all things regarding the faith.That verse is not limiterd to apostles. It includes all of God's childlren.
This means that the Church can teach us the right moral positions on such things as in vitro fertilization, cloning and other issues that are not addressed in the Bible.It means no such thing. The Bible simply doesnt address such thing.
After all, these issues of morality are necessary for our salvation, and God would not leave such important issues to be decided by us sinners without His divine assistance.Those issues are not necessary for our salvation. Only one thing is necessay for our salvation---being born again and accepeting Jesus as our Lord and Savior.
John 16:12 - Jesus had many things to say but the apostles couldn't bear them at that point. This demonstrates that the Church's infallible doctrine develops over time. <<
No church has complete infallible doctrines and if the ones who personally know Jesus couldn't understand, wha makes you think those hundred of years later could.
All public Revelation was completed with the death of the last apostle, but the doctrine of God's Revelation develops as our minds and hearts are able to welcome and understand it. God teaches His children only as much as they can bear, for their own good.Right, but He teaches us from His holy word, not from the opinions of sinful, fallible and errent men.
John 16:13 - Jesus promises that the Spirit will "guide" the Church into all truth. Our knowledge of the truth develops as the Spirit guides the Church, and this happens over time.
It does not. It teaches that the Holy Spirit will guide YOU(His followers) into all the truth.
kermit
No, when I peer into the pages of New Testament I see the fullness of the Catholic Church revealed, complete with it's three-fold ministry. It was with us then, and it's with us now. I'm not sure how the SDA works, but I know that within protestantism there exists a two-fold ministry and a five-fold ministry. Then of course you have the emergent church and the remnant church as well as the house church movements who, to me, are the most guilty of trying to recreate the Church in their own image.
I also know the promise of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church. So, where do protestants get this idea that they need to reinstate the Church?
You mean, other than that Christ instituted bishops (which includes archbishops and cardinals and popes)? Christ chose apostles, yes or yes? Bishops are successors of the apostles. "Catholic scholars" (maybe you could cite one or two?) do nothing of the sort. Timothy was a bishop ordained by Paul. So was Titus. Peter was named head of the Church on Earth. Priests were appointed by bishops to help them with ever increasing numbers of the faithful. Deacons, also, assisted bishops. So the word is not Biblical, but then, neither is "Trinity" or "Bible". And yet they're valid concepts and institutions.As you are well aware, scripture has absolutely nothing in it about archbishops, cardinals, and a papal office. Catholic scholars teach that the primitive church had but two offices - elder (presbyter)/bishop (overseer) and deacon. Everything that you mentioned can be traced over a period of time as various church organizations have evolved and language has developed.
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month between the two evenings is the LORD's Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD; seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days; in the seventh day is a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. (Leviticus 23:5)
The biblical regulations for the observance of the festival require that all leavening be disposed of before the beginning of the 15th of Nisan. An unblemished lamb or goat, known as the Paschal Lamb, is to be set apart on Nisan 10, and slaughtered at dusk as Nisan 14 ends in preparation for the 15th of Nisan when it will be eaten after being roasted. The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "between the two evenings". It is then to be eaten "that night", Nisan 15, roasted, without the removal of its internal organs with unleavened bread, known as matzo, and bitter herbs known as maror. Nothing of the sacrifice on which the sun rises by the morning of the 15th of Nisan may be eaten, but must be burned. The sacrifices may only be performed in a specific place prescribed by God (for Judaism, Jerusalem, and for Samaritans, Mount Gerizim)..
From Exodus 12, 16, and Deuteronomy 16. This is how it was celebrated until the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
And you folks don't think Catholics read or know the Bible...
Really? What did they do before there was a Bible? When there was a disagreement, they prayed, debated, prayed some more, and came to a decision. See Acts 15.Which promise? That the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit?
John 14:16 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would be with the Church forever. The Spirit prevents the teaching of error on faith and morals. It is guaranteed because the guarantee comes from God Himself who cannot lie.
Only if the person listens to the Holy Spirit and what he hears must be from the Bible, not freom man. Even withing the Catholic church there has been some disagreements, so how do you account for that?
True, but the question I answered was "Where does Jesus promise that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church?"John 14:26 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would teach the Church (the apostles and successors) all things regarding the faith.
That verse is not limiterd to apostles. It includes all of God's childlren.
This means that the Church can teach us the right moral positions on such things as in vitro fertilization, cloning and other issues that are not addressed in the Bible.Which proves that doctrine can develop. And it means that we can apply the principals the Church gives us to develop them.It means no such thing. The Bible simply doesnt address such thing.
After all, these issues of morality are necessary for our salvation, and God would not leave such important issues to be decided by us sinners without His divine assistance.So it's ok to do evil, such as IVF or cloning or abortion, as long as you're born again and accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior (Where's that in the Bible, anyway?)?Those issues are not necessary for our salvation. Only one thing is necessay for our salvation---being born again and accepeting Jesus as our Lord and Savior.
The Church that holds all of Jesus' doctrine, or those of the one Jesus appointed to lead His church has complete infallible doctrine. The Holy Spirit guides them.John 16:12 - Jesus had many things to say but the apostles couldn't bear them at that point. This demonstrates that the Church's infallible doctrine develops over time. <<
No church has complete infallible doctrines and if the ones who personally know Jesus couldn't understand, wha makes you think those hundred of years later could.
Then how come so many get it wrong? It's true that the Holy Spirit will lead us, but many of us aren't willing to follow. That's the problem.All public Revelation was completed with the death of the last apostle, but the doctrine of God's Revelation develops as our minds and hearts are able to welcome and understand it. God teaches His children only as much as they can bear, for their own good.
It does not. It teaches that the Holy Spirit will guide YOU(His followers) into all the truth.
kermit
PS need to use the / to stop a quote...
That last comment was uncalled for.
I hope you understand that Exodus and Deuteronomy were written centuries before the first century. The question was how you know precisely what the seder celebration was in the first century when Jesus celebrated with His disciples. You seem to believe that the present Orthodox Jewish seder is somehow unbiblical and that the Jews of today either do not read or do not follow Exodus and/or Deuteronomy. Granted that they do not have the Levitical priesthood or the Temple, but they assuredly do have lambs to eat and unleavened bread.
In any event, back to your initial supposition - that the Passover seder was returning to the actual Passover meal and was not a memorial meal in honor of God's passing over of the Jewish people. There is nothing in either passage to suggest that the Passover was anything other than a memorial. The priest did not mystically get sent back in time to Egypt when he made the offering in the Temple and the Jews did not go there either. It is wishful thinking to imagine that they did.
You mean, other than that Christ instituted bishops (which includes archbishops and cardinals and popes)? Christ chose apostles, yes or yes? Bishops are successors of the apostles. "Catholic scholars" (maybe you could cite one or two?)
do nothing of the sort. Timothy was a bishop ordained by Paul. So was Titus. Peter was named head of the Church on Earth. Priests were appointed by bishops to help them with ever increasing numbers of the faithful. Deacons, also, assisted bishops. So the word is not Biblical, but then, neither is "Trinity" or "Bible". And yet they're valid concepts and institutions.
The practice of Rome was not to rebaptize certain heretics coming into the Catholic Church;-snip-
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?