quote:

ORIGINAL: texastweet
Exactly! You got it! The Church holds up all examples of exceptional virtue and faith. Numerous converts have realized that as well. Of course there is "good" in other faiths, but you can't realize the "full monty" if you will.

quote:

ORIGINAL: texastweet
Well thats my point kind of. See Catholic's believe that Jesus left in place a rule of faith or "a way" that is like Him, unchanging and timeless and works now like it did then. You state correctly that the average Church goer couldn't read and didn't have a bible on their table. So the way we see it, the protestant rule of sola scriptura couldn't even be used until some time after the invention of the printing press. That sure doesn't seem to make much sense. It's like saying that Jesus didn't really want the average Joe to be good sola scriptura Christians until 1500 years later and someone invented the printing press.

quote:

ORIGINAL: texastweet

quote:

Well, it wouldn't have been necessary if centuries of Catholic leaders had not perverted Jesus's message for their own political, financial, and power-hungry ends.

In your attempt to take a cheap shot at the Church you in fact make my point. In admitting that the printing was necessary for SS to be a "rule" you are saying that for 1500 years people couldn't be Christian and essentially Christ's mission failed. Maybe I missed the passage in the bible about a printing press being invented?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mannamuncher
Unfortunately, many ignore the words of Pope Jesus.

Jesus said to ABIDE in His words. That's The Bible !

quote:

ORIGINAL: texastweet

quote:

Well, it wouldn't have been necessary if centuries of Catholic leaders had not perverted Jesus's message for their own political, financial, and power-hungry ends.

In your attempt to take a cheap shot at the Church you in fact make my point. In admitting that the printing was necessary for SS to be a "rule" you are saying that for 1500 years people couldn't be Christian and essentially Christ's mission failed. Maybe I missed the passage in the bible about a printing press being invented?

Otis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zhi
There is unity in our reliance on and devotion to Jesus Christ.

I don't think the Truth really cares about things like whether or not you use drums in your worship. I personally don't think that the Truth has anything to do with how many elders you have or who they are or your organizational structure. That tends to be the main things that are different among Protestant churches.

quote:

Well, it wouldn't have been necessary if centuries of Catholic leaders had not perverted Jesus's message for their own political, financial, and power-hungry ends.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Papa-san

quote:

ORIGINAL: texastweet
Exactly! You got it! The Church holds up all examples of exceptional virtue and faith. Numerous converts have realized that as well. Of course there is "good" in other faiths, but you can't realize the "full monty" if you will.

That church holds up all examples of Tom-foolery dressed in pompous robes and glittering trinkets. There is barely any spiritual meat in their teachings, and they exist solely to further their own interests. Jesus Christ is barely visible past the "Holy Father", the cloud of saints, and the stellar centerpiece of "The Co-Redeemer, Mary"! However we have to give 'em credit on mentioning Him as they sacrifice His body over, and over, and over in defiance of the Truth of the Gospel...

Yeah, It's the Full Monty alright...

Get real!

quote:


I beg to differ that these are the only main things different in Protestantism.

While the Truth may not make too much of having drums in worship, or whether you kneel or stand up, but it does matter when there are different doctrines that claim to have the right teachings of the One Truth.

Today there are the Anabaptist, Arminian, Wesleyan, Penticostal and Existential theologies. They variously teach infralapsarianism, supralapsarianism, and sublapsarianism and take different dogmatic positions whether Lutheran, Reformed, Arminian or Socinian.

In the Eucharistic teaching they differ widely, too: Lutheran – consubstantiationism, Calvinist and Methodist – spiritual presence, Baptist – memorial.

And then you have the Unitarianist, which I have to admit, I am not too sure if Protestants consider them as part of them.

So, where among them, does the real and only Truth reside? They can't all have the One Truth and teach different things or take different doctrinal positions at the same time? Only one can claim to have the fullness of the Truth, the others can only claim parts or most of it only.

quote:

Yeah...as we all know, Protestants are completely immune to perverting Jesus's message for their own personal financial gain and power-hungry ends...

quote:

Unitarians aren't really Protestant.

quote:

Eucharist is not a salvic issue (at least not to Protestants) so it's more of a "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" question.

quote:

There is unity in our reliance on and devotion to Jesus Christ.

I don't think the Truth really cares about things like whether or not you use drums in your worship. I personally don't think that the Truth has anything to do with how many elders you have or who they are or your organizational structure. That tends to be the main things that are different among Protestant churches.

quote:

Ecclesiastically, the Reformation created a paradoxical situation. Unable to deny Rome's right of existence as a Christian church, yet also unable to come to terms with the Vatican's self-interpretation, the Reformers had no alternative but to sacrifice the external oneness of the church for the sake of the Gospel. In the history of Protestantism, this basic decision became the foundation of denominationalism. Whenever people were subjectively certain that their disagreement with an established Protestant group rested on a biblical basis, they felt authorized to form a new denomination.

The starting point of this development implied an inconsistency, however. Like their Catholic opponents, the Reformers were sure that God had spoken to them in a particular way, and hence they felt justified in excommunicating and anathematizing those who did not share their understanding of the Gospel. Yet on the basis of their principles they had to think of the oneness of the church as a purely heavenly fact. Hence they were unable in the manner of their Catholic opponents to persecute those who taught differently by the methods of the Inquisition. True enough, the Lutheran and Reformed Churches employed political authorities in their fight against Anabaptists and Schwärmer. But their internal dissensions troubled them enough to prevent them from making the suppression of heresy a matter of dogma. They expressed the incompatibility of different doctrines by means of forming territorial churches on a denominational basis.

The proliferation of denominations which resulted from these tactics was increasingly felt as a burden in Protestantism. The indifference shown for each other and the uncharitable spirit of competition deployed particularly on the mission field led to such a distortion of the nature of the church that eventually even its spiritual oneness disappeared from sight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zhi

As mentioned in the other thread, I need to make this short. I have to get up at 5 to get hubby to the airport and I spent most of this weekend except church time drywalling a very large ceiling, so I'm exhausted. Hopefully I will be sufficiently coherent.

Unitarians do not even consider themselves necessarily Christian, so designating themselves as Protestant would be sort of a cart-before-the-horse situation.

I do not consider baptism to be a salvic issue. I consider baptism to be an important demonstration of the work Christ has done in us, but given that the thief on the cross had not opportunity to be baptised and yet he was told by Christ that he would be with Him in Heaven that very night, I do not see any reason to consider it salvic.

I have been a member of 5 different Protestant denominations so far, and have attended countless others. The differences are really not that severe. Not all Protestant denominations accept each other as brothers in Christ, but most do.

I am not sure what you mean with your reference to "below the belt". Perhaps you could clarify. Otherwise, no, I do not believe that the current manifestation of the RCC is, according to Scripture, the same church that Jesus sent out with the Great Commission. Their doctrine simply does not fit that which is in Scripture, and their history is frankly horrifying. Thinking about it, their current issues are also frankly horrifying.

My own father in law has a different position than I do on the end times. We get along great. In fact, I hope to move closer to my inlaws in the very near future, as they're delightful people and I would like our daughter to grow up near them. I have never seen anyone "come to blows" over doctrinal issues.

I suppose I would ask you... why RCC and not Greek Orthodox? They're both ancient churches, their doctrine is rather similar, and their history is considerably less, well, scary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: authorcrat

Protestantism today bears little resemblance from the ideals of the Reformation and the vision and teachings of Martin Luther in the 16th century.

With many different types of belief systems within Protestantism and without a central unifying figure or an authoritative teaching body like the pope and the Magisterium to correct erroneous teachings,...

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1love1God1way

quote:

ORIGINAL: CropDuster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Papa-san

Well, from a scriptural perspective, my views are accurate. From a moral standpoint, impeccable. Prejudicial? Yeah... I'm working on that...

I am trying to motivate my brother to find the Truth and walk away from lies. How is that NOT being his keeper?!? I expect to hear "Well done..." when all is said and done. I can expect this because my instruction comes from God, not men...

And, in addition, you're arrogant about your mischief-making. No, you're not right from any Christian perspective. But then again, you do have something of a point. The more you attack your fellow Christians, the more you seem Wright.

That seemed completely unnecessary.

quote:

The only unity I have seen among most Protestants is their unity against the Catholic Church.
Do not tell me that Protestants are in any way united. They are not.

quote:

Writing in 1964, the esteem Protestant theologian, Otto Piper of the Princeton Seminary, observed:

quote:

Do not tell me that Protestants are in any way united. They are not.

quote:

IMWAC-EN
International Movement We Are Church
European Network Church on the Move
FORUM
FORUM EUROPÄISCHER CHRISTINNEN UND CHRISTEN - FEC
FORO EUROPEO DE CRISTIANAS Y CRISTIANOS - FEC
FORUM EUROPÉEN DE CHRÉTIENNES ET DE CHRÉTIENS - FEC
FORUM EUROPEO DI CRISTIANE E CRISTIANI - FEC
FORUM OF EUROPEAN CHRISTIANS - FEC
FORUM VAN EUROPESE CHRISTENEN - FEC


The European Bishops Synod
1. The division within the Roman Catholic Church

For the last decades, problems relating to faith and morality, politics, economics, social, sexual and family decisions, have all been the subject of such differing interpretations among Roman Catholics, that they have led to a split without precedent in the history of the Church.

This division calls for careful analysis. It can be compared with the ongoing schisms between it and other Christian churches, in some cases for more than a millennium, and which have also played an important role in the conflicts between various European nations.

On the occasion of the European Bishops Synod, we feel it worthwhile to focus on a number of considerations in respect of the division within the Roman Catholic Church.

1.1. Our analysis of the division in the Church

Social-religious studies show, without exception, that there is no unanimity among Roman Catholics in following official Church teaching. International and trans-cultural inquiries - such as that carried out by the North American sociologist Greeley - show particularly clearly how the faithful have reached totally different opinions, even in matters which Papal authority regards as closed for discussion (i.e. 'almost dogmas'), such as the ordination of women and married men. In many countries, the majority of the faithful think and act in a manner which the Church's teaching qualifies as 'erroneous'

This is particularly true of matters concerning family and sexual ethics :

The majority of Roman Catholics regard not only the Papal teaching on birth control as mistaken - to such an extent even that they have no 'guilt feelings' about it - but also the teaching on pre-marital sex, cohabitation, fertility interventions, divorce and abortion, etc.

In the political and social field, the divisions are just as clear.

Roman Catholic advocates of pacifism and non-violence stand opposed to Roman Catholics who justify war (e.g. the NAVO bombings in the Balkans).

Roman Catholics in favour of ethnic and racial integration find themselves confronted by other Roman Catholics who have other opinions on the subject.

Roman Catholics favouring neo-liberal economic theories (with the market and profit at the centre) stand against other Roman Catholics who give their support to various movements which condemn capitalism and neo-liberalism as modern forms of 'mammon'.

Roman Catholics who see Roman Catholic schools as an expression of religious freedom, and Roman Catholics who see schools for the children of the rich as basic anti-democracy training grounds.

Roman Catholics who fight for an 'ethical state' (or even a confessional state') and Roman Catho-lics who struggle for a (laicised) 'constitutional state'.

Roman Catholic defenders of the social order by force (penal code, imprisonment, capital punishment, armed self-defence) against Roman Catholics who give preference to educative and rehabilitating measures (group therapy, training centres, self-defence committees, publicity campaigns, and so on.)...