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.
hint: Protestant Reformation
As a Lutheran - perhaps you have heard of it.
I am not clear on how that helps your point.Funny thing that sda's (seventh day adventists) are better versed in what the catholic church believes than I am.
Ok so when I point out that the ceremonial laws on sacrifice and offerings ended at the cross according to Heb 10:4-12 and that even your own denomination affirms this point , but the moral law of God that includes the TEN -- remain -- what about this do you find the least bit "new" or different from what you already believe?And I have probably said it before, but ... the catholic church is the church that provides the best fit to the Bible as I know it until now
You have free will - you can reject whatever teaching you like.So? I see no reason to believe that Adventists have a special knowledge of prophecy.
Some say that - but It is not true. However my argument is not to argue for Ellen White's 1 Cor 12 prophetic gift. My point is that Bible doctrine is true and that the Bible says in Eph 4 and 1 Cor 12 that spiritual gifts continue until the end of time.Ellen White's prophecies did not come true
"the protesting Catholics" actually proselytized existing Catholics to join their movement. Have you heard of it?Luther didn't proselytize
ITs all Christianity - just as the case with Methodists, Baptists, and Adventists. Its the same religion but a different denomination.. He wasn't inducing people to join a new religion.
Numbers 12:5-8 and 1 Cor 12 never argue that that prophet must perform "a sign from God" to have the 1 Cor 12 gift of prophecy.When they refused to give any biblical evidence for their prophetic gifts, such as a sign from God, they ran away in shame.
You already know the answer. The sabbath is no longer a mandatory day off. Jesus did not require it in the NT. He did require the other 9. How could this be difficult?Ok so when I point out that the ceremonial laws on sacrifice and offerings ended at the cross according to Heb 10:4-12 and that even your own denomination affirms this point , but the moral law of God that includes the TEN -- remain -- what about this do you find the least bit "new" or different from what you already believe?
"the protesting Catholics" actually proselytized existing Catholics to join their movement. Have you heard of it?
Luther nailed his 95 objections to a Catholic church door
- years later Luther started calling the Pope "Antichrist".
His reformation movement put Germany in a state of civil war.
You have free will - you can reject whatever teaching you like.
But that was not your statement before. Earlier you made the claim that having direct information from God was in same way "bad" and I simply point out that you condemn the entire NT church when you make those sorts of general statements.
Some say that - but It is not true. However my argument is not to argue for Ellen White's 1 Cor 12 prophetic gift. My point is that Bible doctrine is true and that the Bible says in Eph 4 and 1 Cor 12 that spiritual gifts continue until the end of time.
hint: Protestant Reformation
As a Lutheran - perhaps you have heard of it.
"the protesting Catholics" actually proselytized existing Catholics to join their movement. Have you heard of it?
The NT Jewish Christians were proselytizing non-Christian Jews in Acts 2 - and Acts 17, and Acts 18:4 and ... -- to join them.
Out of curiosity - how is it you think SDA claim that the reformation was an apocalyptic event??
Do you mean that we claim that the Bible predicted the "falling away" in 2 Thess 2 in the case of false doctrines entering the church and then it would need to be "restored"? What is your meaning?
We don't deny the Catholics are Christians either - but we claim they are a different denomination just as Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Adventists etc.We do not view the Reformation as a restoration, as Adventists and similar groups seem to. We don't deny that Catholics are actual Christians
His doctrines were distinct "enough" from the Catholic denomination that he ended up forming his own and getting the Bible into the language of the people was a big part of that.Which he didn't intend. Luther was a complicated man, of course, but he wasn't a fan of war.
And so do we. And so do all other Christian denominations.Not true. Jesus preached in public,
His doctrines were distinct "enough" from the Catholic denomination that he ended up forming his own and getting the Bible into the language of the people was a big part of that.
He did not quote "Do not take God's name in vain" but that did not delete the commandment - as we all know.The sabbath is no longer a mandatory day off. Jesus did not require it in the NT.
We don't deny the Catholics are Christians either - but we claim they are a different denomination just as Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Adventists etc.
We share open communion with all of them in OUR services.
The NT Christian church for oneYou know what kind of organizations say they have secret knowledge that nobody else has?
that's what the Non-Christian Jews said about the early ChristiansCults
All I hear is a sect claiming they have the truth and nobody else has it. This is the same thing numerous other cults and sects preach.
The NT church claimed to have direct Revelation from God. Are you familiar with the book of Revelation? Or 2Thess 2? or 2 Thess 1? Or Acts 1? or 2 Cor 12? or ....The early Church never claimed to have special knowledge in that manner.
But the NT does not claim that ALL have the gift of Prophecy - read 1 Cor 12 regarding that point. In fact in 1 Cor 14"1-3 Paul says "I WISH That you all had the gift of prophecy"The Gospel of John actually contradicts this notion, it says Christ is the light that enlightens all (John 1:9)
. My point is that Bible doctrine is true and that the Bible says in Eph 4 and 1 Cor 12 that spiritual gifts continue until the end of time.
NT writers did in fact claim to have pure doctrine - and very specific expertise in discerning correct doctrine as we see in the claims made in Eph 4.I don't doubt that. I just doubt that a particular sect has any expertise in discerning them.
We hold communion with those who claim to have accepted Christ as their Savior and we do not believe in what is called "Baptismal regeneration". Rather we believe in what 1 Peter 3 calls "The appeal to God for a clean conscience" which can only be made by "believers" not infants.Do SDA's recognize the validity of infant baptism, or do you commune the unbaptized?
Well I suppose you know that the rest of Christianity does view Lutherans as a denomination. In fact they are more than one denomination. Just as Baptists are more than one denomination.Lutherans actually don't consider themselves to be their own denomination,
No doubt - but Lutherans have a body of doctrines that define them -- and that is the issue we are talking about.Other groups pinned that on them.
I am not aware of any denomination that claims that the Vulgate is not a translation of scripture -- what are you talking about??There is nothing in the Lutheran doctrine that says Jerome's Vulgate doesn't contain the Word of God also.
We hold communion with those who claim to have accepted Christ as their Savior and we do not believe in what is called "Baptismal regeneration". Rather we believe in what 1 Peter 3 calls "The appeal to God for a clean conscience" which can only be made by "believers" not infants.
So while infants are not invited to partake of the communion emblems we do invite knowing-believers to do so. And we only practice baptism of believers.
infants do not share the communion bread.. but they are in church.You said you communed everyone, right? Everyone includes children. My religion doesn't discriminate against Christians based on age.
infants do not share the communion bread.. but they are in church.
Children are also in church.
What is the point of having someone participate in communion who either can not or does not claim to have accepted Christ as their Savior of their own free will -- in your POV?
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?