Re: Questions protesents won't awnser

Hello iraey <Iraey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
you posted in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic :
>christia@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> Hello iraey <Iraey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> you posted in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic :
>>
>>>Question 1. Where in the bible does it say that salvation is by faith
>>>alone ?
>>>James 2
>>>17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
>>>18 But some one will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me
>>>your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.
>>>
>>>Paul informs us that we were created to do good works (Ephesians 2:10).
>>> Paul expects just as much of a changed life as James does
>>>
>>>Ephesians 2
>>>8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your
>>>own doing, it is the gift of God--
>>>9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.
>>>10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works,
>>>which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
>>
>>
>> So our salvation is by FAITH, NOT of works (what WE do). THEN we do
>> good works. Hmmm, looks like you answered your own question here.
>
>That is my point we believe you have to have a real conversion of the
>heart, mind and soul. That this conversion has to be lived every day.
>You do works to repay the debt of your sin not because your not forgiven
>but it's the right thing to do. Works are also done as a by product of
>grace and faith in communion with Christ. How many time have I seen
>people that claim salvation but don't walk the walk. The church helps me
>walk the walk and live the life.

But your religon also has you talking to dead people who can't hear
you, bowing down before statues (graven images), and elevating one
sinner above the whole church, your pope.
>>
>>>Question 2. Where does it say in the bible that the bible is the only
>>>athority for worship and theology ?
>>>John 21
>>>25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one
>>>of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain
>>>the books that would be written.
>>
>>
>> He did many things indeed. He ate. He bathed. He urinated and had
>> bowel movements. EXACTLY WHERE IN THIS PASSAGE does it say that any
>> of these "other" things have "authority for worship OR theology?"
>> Just because Jesus said and did other things does NOT give you license
>> to make stuff up and PRETEND that these are "those things." But the
>> rcc PRETENDS that it does.
>>
>I don't think that it's the diabolical scam many profess to present the
>Traditions of the church as anything but the oral and practice of our
>religion and theology.

So all of mariology (which didn't begin, certainly didn't develop
until long after the beginning of the THIRD CENTURY is not a scam?
Bowing down before statues, praying to dead people is not a scam?

It may be "the oral and practice of [your] theology these days, but
for at least 300 years after the beginning of Christ's church it was
NOT IN HIS CHURCH.

>As you believe and worship is correct for you
>this is right for me.

Whatever GOD teaches is right and correct is what you should be
looking for, not what I believe or what your pope believes, but what
scripture says GOD has taught. Your perception and my perception do
not make things right with God. What He has SAID does.

>As you profess my worship as wrong I could do the
>same.

Show me in scripture and I will change. Don't show me "spin" put on
scripture by the rcc, but SCRIPTURE ITSELF. And I will change in a
heartbeat. I want to be conformed to God's way, not my own.

>I think that we as christ children can agree to disagree but we do
>Christ and all Christianity a diservice by fighting among ourselves.

When we err, we should tell each other, listen to each other, and as
the Bereans of the Bible did, search the scriptures to see if what is
said is true.

>Christian you present yourself well and i thank you for your comments.

Thank you.
>
>>>Question 3. When did the preisthood of the Apostles and the Bishops
>>>they place in the early church stop?
>>>Matthew 28
>>>18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on
>>>earth has been given to me.
>>>19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
>>>name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
>>>20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am
>>>with you always, to the close of the age."
>>
>> 2
>> NOT ONE PRIEST mentioned here. NOT ONE SINGLE "APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION"
>> mentione here.
>>
>> 1 Peter 2:7-10
>> 7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are
>> disobedient,
>> "The stone which the builders rejected
>> Has become the chief cornerstone,"
>> 8 and
>> "A stone of stumbling
>> And a rock of offense."
>> They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were
>> appointed.
>> 9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood , a holy nation,
>> His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who
>> called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were
>> not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy
>> but now have obtained mercy.
>> NKJV
>>
>> Let's see now. . .
>> In verse 7 it is being spoken to ALL BELIEVERS, not just to poopes or
>> the rcc royalty.
>>
>> And the one who is "the stone, the stone, and the rock" is most
>> certainly Jesus Christ, not a poope of the rcc.
>>
>> And ALL BELIEVERS (see verse 9) are PRIESTS.
>>
>> So your whole theory sinks into a hole, just as the rcc theology does.
>>
>The early church fathers talk about the priesthood and the sacrament of
>holy orders just after the times of the apostles. I think that the
>organization of the church was well established at that time. The
>scriptures deal with witness and very little with the first organization
>of the church. Would you concede that.

Let's see some first century CITATIONS if you think you can find them.
So far I have not seen any such things. I can pull the most of the
citations from documents I have on shelves within arms-reach. Those I
don't have, I can get in a day. We'll SEE if there are any references
to any "sacrament of holy orders" or any heirarchy of priests in the
first century (the original) church, or if what they did have matches
at all what the rcc has today.

And although scripture does not give a lot of detail (it appears to
leave quite a bit up to the individual congregations) about the
"pecking order" within the local congregations, it does tell us some.
It talks about bishops (overseers) who are to be over the
congregation, that they must be of good repute, MARRIED WITH CHILDREN,
etc. It says that the overseers and shepherds (pastors) "rule" over
the congregation. It speaks of "elders" and "deacons," all within the
local congregation. It does not place ANYONE EXCEPT THE APOSTLES
THEMSELVES and JESUS above the local congregational leve. In
Scripture, the leadership of Christ's church doesn't resemble the rcc
much at all, now does it?

>If not then we have to assume that by individual interpretation of
>scriptures that any profession of faith and worship would be right as
>long as you could take scripture and justify your faith.

But ONLY IN THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE SCRIPTURE WAS GIVEN. Scripture
tends to "interpret" scripture. "New inventions" and "made-up" stuff
cannot be justified; it isn't IN there! It didn't exist in Christ's
church. That is why the mariology junk, the praying to dead "saints"
stuff, etc. are not worth anything to God at all. They were man's
creations, not from God, but later "inventions."

>If this was
>true I could see the problem folks have with the RCC, But that zeros out
>1500 years of Christian history. That would invalidate the bible since
>the Canon of Scriptures was put together by the same church fathers that
> the RCC bases it's theology and practices on. RCCers embrace the
>apostles and church fathers.

Let's see now. GOD led Christian men to pen GOD'S Word. Christian
men made copies and copies, but it wasn't until about 400 years later
that some rag-tag group decided it was "official." So the collection
gathered together by the rag-tags then became the WRITINGS of the
ragtags? Naah, it doesn't work that way. The Scriptures were
SCRIPTURE long before the rcc came into existance.

>Most Protestants don't even embrace the
>founders of their origins (Luther and Calvin).

We appreciate the things those guys did, but they didn't "found our
origins;" we existed long before they did. And before the rcc did
too.
>
in Christ Jesus,
Christian (a member of Christ's body, His church, but NOT a member of
the corrupt and apostate rcc)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: We need good religion to drive out bad religion says Archbishop
    ... in the gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, and thus the Church had/has ... which is why the RCC understands the need for some 'safe area' ... There are too many warnings in scripture ... some are for truth and some are for using the church ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: Infant Baptism is fake baptism
    ... You dont have an accurate picture of Church History... ... confuse us with the RCC.. ... Your orthodox religion was founded when it split ... only over Scripture but also to judge other people's salvation. ...
    (alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic)
  • Re: Questions protesents wont awnser
    ... 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. ... I don't think that it's the diabolical scam many profess to present the Traditions of the church as anything but the oral and practice of our religion and theology. ... In verse 7 it is being spoken to ALL BELIEVERS, not just to poopes or the rcc royalty. ... If this was true I could see the problem folks have with the RCC, But that zeros out 1500 years of Christian history. ...
    (alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic)
  • Re: Re: *BELIEF then BAPTISM the reasons WHY!*
    ... or refute what the church teaches about the faith. ... My faith is based on direct revelation from God to me, ... direct revelation from God to other people and through events of this life. ... the Protestant approach gave pre-eminence to Scripture, ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: "anti-Xmas" thread followup
    ... I come from a church that had its own prophet and inspired writings (well turns out they were mostly plegerzied (? ... But when the NT was written by the various authors, any scripture to which they referred was the OT. ... At least that might reassure you that it wasn't the RCC who adopted it in the Middle Ages, and certainly not the Church of England. ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
Loading