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.
I do know for a fact their is a St John Calvin church, though my guess is these guys would be horrified by that label being attached to them! (being obedient to our LORD)Yeah, so why aren't they called saints by their respective legacies? I've seen many Lutheran churches named for saints - but none St Martin - maybe I'm wrong - please correct me. I've never seen a St John Calvin either... Are they worthy? How about anyone since then? Where are your saints?
P.S. For obvious reasons, I doubt the Orthodox church would ever recognize them, but only God truly makes a saint.
He was taught by the apostle John, Mont. So John taught him wrongly?
Thek!IIRC, the original texts were written in one case (only upper case?); capitalization (when translated) is at the discretion of the translator.
Even if taught correctly, his learning skills may have been uneven.
Yes, only God makes believers.Originally Posted by Kristos
Yeah, so why aren't they called saints by their respective legacies? I've seen many Lutheran churches named for saints - but none St Martin - maybe I'm wrong - please correct me. I've never seen a St John Calvin either... Are they worthy? How about anyone since then? Where are your saints?
P.S. For obvious reasons, I doubt the Orthodox church would ever recognize them, but only God truly makes a saint.
You act as if discernment is a gift given exclusively to your denomination.
Many parts of Scripture clearly reveal the nonsensical and unbiblical nature of your denomination's teachings.
I am simply contending that Calvin, and many of the other reformers, were very adept at elucidating Scripture and, in doing so, revealed the error in the teachings of semi-Pelagian faiths like your own.
If you choose to reject his interpretive work, I have not the power to change your mind, nor would I say I have the inclination to attempt to do so.
Where???!!!! You guys keep saying this but it has never actually found its way into this debate.
Anything at all that indicates that the robust practice of canonization is justified? Anything?
I have... I have also showed you what the very early Church practices were. it is up to you to show me just exactly how this contradicts what is written in the bible and Christianity in general.Well since you are so certain, show me where in the Bible it says that the RCC endows Sainthood? Show me where men, any men, get to determine whether a person is least or greatest in Heaven?
Thek!
Do you personaly think that that amount of discretion is ever enough to alter a revealed truth?
Even if taught correctly, his learning skills may have been uneven.
Yes, only God makes believers.
His, not our, saints are everywhere. Some even outside of sects.
The naming-after-saints was learned from pagan temple naming habits, and I first notice it at Constantinople, where Constantine had temples built for the Christians.
So the calling a temple "church" & owning real estate property as a corporate entity got a jump start there.
The whole "Are they worthy?" thing is a bit gauche.
Historical noteriety need not evoke swooning epiphanies.
Of what pertinence is Hitler to the discussion? Are you trying to draw a parallel between Hitler and Calvin, or perhaps between those who follow Hitler and those who believe Calvin was correct in his work? Or are you simply seeking to defame Calvinists as is so common in your crowd? Would it benefit the discussion to liken your Pope to that of a servant of satan? You make similar allegations when you draw these types of parallels.
First, we are not presumptuous enough to expect anyone to believe Calvin was worthy of honor. First, we are not presumptuous enough to expect anyone to believe Calvin was worthy of honor. You either believe he was, or you don't.
First, we are not presumptuous enough to expect anyone to believe Calvin was worthy of honor.
You either believe he was, or you don't.
Again, none of these things have the first thing whatsoever to do with a discussion about whether your denomination has the authority or the ability to determine the level of a person's sanctification.
You make a ridiculous argument, and in consideration of the nature of most of your posts, that is truly saying something.
Not quite.Yeznik;Hello pot meet kettle.
Perhaps, but do our transgressions excuse those of "The One True Church" ?Well it seems that pagan naming convention has actually has permeated deeply into the American Protestant culture.
What church is that?Let start with the Lincoln monument, pagan style complete temple with a giant statue.
True, but only a distratction from, not realy relevant to the naming of churches after saints.The statue of Liberty the concept, holding the Torch, and don't forget her crown, cannot be a goddess without a crown.
True enough. I don't care for that junk either, but none of those are pagan temples or christian churches so your commentary is irrelevant except to try & diminish by comparison the pagan practices of the RCC.But wait there is more, if statues are not your cup of tea, there is also an obelisk at the country's capital.
Calvin was a believer. The Bible calls believers saints even if you don't. The evidence is in the scriptures you render of no effect with your traditions.Not only that but have asked repeatly for evidence to call Calvin a Saint and none has been produce.
The evidence is in the scriptures you render of no effect with your traditions.
Not quite.
Perhaps, but do our transgressions excuse those of "The One True Church" ?
What church is that?
True, but only a distratction from, not realy relevant to the naming of churches after saints.
True enough. I don't care for that junk either, but none of those are pagan temples or christian churches so your commentary is irrelevant except to try & diminish by comparison the pagan practices of the RCC.
Anti-Protestantism is alive & well here.
I've yet to see a single shred of evidence that the practice of canonization, whoever it is that's doing it, is biblically justified
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?