Where did the Church first go wrong?

[DrBubbaLove]

Nurse nurse!

Does someone need help answering a simple question they have repeatedly ignored?
Only gave one question that last time. What's the impediment needing medical assistance?

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Actually the thread started off poorly and I objected only when the tone evident in the beginning of this thread got more offensive. And my first reply to the true nature of the jab in the OP being revealed actually made some light of it. That someone gets chuckles from throwing rocks at a Church they obviously do not understand and arm themselves to do so by discrediting all the Apostles and by inference God's choice in them is not funny at all.

I thought it went rather well.

 

[Albion]

Is there a rule about how threads end here?

Apparently not. Some go over 1000 and continue on, while others go dead for awhile and then someone starts them up again even years later.

In this thread, though, it seems that the posts have, for quite a while, merely been repeating earlier points.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Apparently not. Some go over 1000 and continue on, while others go dead for awhile and then someone starts them up again even years later.

Really!

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I can't keep going over this just for you.

Move along, nothing to see here.

Don't recall an explanation of how someone can view themselves morally superior to the Apostles which would be a given - that is unless there was a denial of doing the exact same type of thing they did in relying on God's Providence. Can't move pass that as the question answering whether there is such a denial apparently cannot be answered due to some medical need.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Don't recall an explanation of how someone can view themselves morally superior to the Apostles which would be a given - that is unless there was a denial of doing the exact same type of thing they did in relying on God's Providence. Can't move pass that as the question answering whether there is such a denial apparently cannot be answered due to some medical need.

What? I never said that. Where did I say that? Your making that up

 

[Albion]

What I would recommend is that someone holding negative opinions about the Church and not desiring to publically air that would not attempt to insert themselves between a poster holding very dim views of the Church and a Catholic defending against such views.

Especially not attempting to do so by making the following comment when the discussion was not about the First Council Jerusalem where the local Bishop would be host but actually the very first acts as Apostles and actually their acknowledged, even by you leader recorded in Acts 1. Not just embarrassing but grossly off swing of any sword. Where did the Church first go wrong?


To which that reply was my first exchange with you in this thread. So whose sword swinging wildly to enter a frey are we talking about?

FWIW, I did realize that I was opening myself to some kind of attack or snarky putdown by taking the serious route in that post and hoping for a reply in kind. I think I have a better solution.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I thought it went rather well.

Which part can I agree went well?
The exposure of really obnoxious and offensive views regarding the faith of others including Catholics or the ability to make a claim without supporting it?
I would agree those went well and appears to be the intent of the OP.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

What? I never said that. Where did I say that? Your making that up

Where in that post did I claim a poster here said that. I said that a claim of superiority would be a given unless a denial was made. We never go to that denial because the question was never answered. Pointing that out is not putting words in anyones mouth or making anything up.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Which part can I agree went well?
The exposure of really obnoxious and offensive views regarding the faith of others including Catholics or the ability to make a claim without supporting it?
I would agree those went well and appears to be the intent of the OP.

Catholics need reproof. Don't be such a woos. And where's this claim i made?

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Where in that post did I claim a poster here said that. I said that a claim of superiority would be a given unless a denial was made. We never go to that denial because the question was never answered. Pointing that out is not putting words in anyones mouth or making anything up.

You're the one putting word in others mouths. Try just being straight instead of waffling on.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

FWIW, I did realize that I was opening myself to some kind of attack or snarky putdown by taking the serious route in that post and hoping for a reply in kind. I think I have a better solution.

Which post was taking the serious route, the reply made to an exchange between two other posters where you mistakenly assumed there was a discussion or point being made about the Church's first council or the reply to my post pointing out that mistake?

 

[JESUS=G.O.A.T]

Lovely. Just on page 2, and already the anti-Catholic rhetoric appears.

Sometimes you just can't help it you know? No jk idk how the anti catholic stuff really got in this but it did. Can't say I'm a catholic fan but I'm not anti catholic I just wouldn't be part of a Catholic Church.

 

[Albion]

Don't recall an explanation of how someone can view themselves morally superior to the Apostles...

This is a loser of an argument. The Apostles are often shown in Scripture to be making mistakes and miscalculations.

The basic contention you're making is as reasonable as the other side's, but it needs to get past this particular idea, no matter how fetching it may seem at first to try to represent the other poster as being against the Apostles or the Bible itself..

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Which post was taking the serious route, the reply made to an exchange between two other posters where you mistakenly assumed there was a discussion or point being made about the Church's first council or the reply to my post pointing out that mistake?

Yeah keep digging you'll find something down there but it won't be the Holy Spirit.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

I've also stated pages ago my position on the Catholic Church that (and i repeat) 'they may be the Loadician Church but they are still my brothers and sister in Christ'. I some times go to Catholic churches, I do not discriminate.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Catholics need reproof. Don't be such a woos. And where's this claim i made?

Is there a denial now?
Recap a claim was made that something very wrong occurs in Acts1 record of the very first thing they do as a unified group. Specifically that the acknowledged (even by you if I recall) leader of the Apostle stood up, appealed to the Holy Ghost foretelling Judas would be replaced, calling for a vetting of all disciples God had preciously called Himself, only being able to narrow that large field down to two, they are led to pray for God's Providence in selecting between them and then allowed His Providence to do so in order to fulfill the prophecy David made about just that.
Was the claim not that there was something not just wrong, but terribly wrong in doing that?

 

[DrBubbaLove]

You're the one putting word in others mouths. Try just being straight instead of waffling on.

Actually as no one has shown where the post in reference did that, the above reply is an example of both making a claim without support and putting words to someone's post that were totally absent.
Being straight about it would be answering the question repeated several times now about unsupported error made by all the Apostles.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Is there a denial now?
Recap a claim was made that something very wrong occurs in Acts1 record of the very first thing they do as a unified group. Specifically that the acknowledged (even by you if I recall) leader of the Apostle stood up, appealed to the Holy Ghost foretelling Judas would be replaced, calling for a vetting of all disciples God had preciously called Himself, only being able to narrow that large field down to two, they are led to pray for God's Providence in selecting between them and then allowed His Providence to do so in order to fulfill the prophecy David made about just that.
Was the claim not that there was something not just wrong, but terribly wrong in doing that?

More waffle! It was the casting of lots. Four words, not a whole paragraph. Just say 'casting lots was fine' and I'll say yes we've discussed this for 30 pages and have a nice day.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Not many consider where it first began to go wrong for the church:

Acts 1:4 On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.

Jesus gave the Apostle this one command just before His Ascension but in that 10 days the apostles chose by votes and lot, and also apart from Gods’ instructions, to replace Judas with Matthias:

Acts 2:26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

This seemly innocuous act carried over and into the Christian faith the Jewish priesthood practice of drawing lots and started an unofficial man made tradition of voting and drawing lots to replace the disciples after they had died, including Peter and which has continued until this day with each new selection of Pope. However, this was never God’s intention as it is God alone who selects His chosen people as proven by the fact that Jesus chose Paul shortly afterwards to be the replacement apostle:

1 Corinthians 15:9
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

The casting of lots is OT and is not for the Church because it is a man made system that is open to corruption and is the problem at the centre of the Catholic Church. If they had of waited on God as they were instructed by Jesus to do, then after the day of Pentecost Paul would have been added to their number. This failure to wait on God and not act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make.

So what's the point? A congratulations party for Protestants?