CALVINISM IS SIMPLY THE GOSPEL BELIEVED

[Eternally Grateful]

As I said, I do not read Beholds responses ot others. I only respond to what he writes to me! And he mentions a few verses, but not in his defense calling the five points demonic and satanic. On this he has been painfully silent.

Are you the authority on these forums on how people should talk?

Let me ask you : Is Behold showing humility when he calls those who believe in the five points deceived, confused and following doctrines of demons?

Is He showing humility when he says I am unsaved and blinded by demons?

Is Behold showing humility when he condescendingly puts down most people he responds to and treats them as a child for they disagree with Him?

I am sorry, but He needs to be knocked down several pegs and maybe a brother needs to humiliate him by showing his spiritual pridse and arrogance.

BTW I am following biblical standards in talkiing to behold the way I do. I spent several different threads patiently showing him why I believe th efive points are true and his perceptions of them are lies. but since then I follow th esecond part of this passage:

1. Proverbs 26:4
   Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
2. Proverbs 26:5
   Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

I spent several threads doing verse 4, now I am convinced i am to do verse 5. Go and check the threads he and I interacted on and see that is true!

Dude. Stop. I am done even trying to reason with you.

You give Christianity a bad name

Your the fool in this discussion. so i will not answer you anymore.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The Catholic Church is the original Church founded by Christ. St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of Antioch ordained by St. Peter, was captured by the Romans. While they were transporting him to be martyred for the faith, he wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans (in today's Turkey, geographcally) around 107-110 A.D., referring to the "Catholic Church," not in such a manner as if he were coining the term, but in such a manner in which he fully expected the Smyrnaeans to understand what he was talking about.
It says in paragraph 8, "Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
See the entire letter here: https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Smyrnaeans.pdf

The Catholic Church was the original Church and it's not even close. The Orthodox splintered off in 1054 A.D. and Protestantism didn't start until the 16th century.

Like I said. you want to blindly follow people who tell you what to believe. feel free

You want to mock God and Mock the cross. Feel free.

Don;t talk to me about following my own doctrine, when you are doing the very thing your demanding I do not do.

 

[Augustin56]

Like I said. you want to blindly follow people who tell you what to believe. feel free

You want to mock God and Mock the cross. Feel free.

Don;t talk to me about following my own doctrine, when you are doing the very thing your demanding I do not do.

Nobody is called to "blindly" follow Christ or those He appointed to lead us. But, we are called to follow Christ through those to whom He gave His authority to lead us. I would never recommend a do-it-yourself approach because you always end up with error (heresy). I'm not following my own doctrine. I'm following Christ's doctrine which He gave to the Apostles, who did likewise to their successors the bishops. The only rellgion on earth that has the full deposit of faith handed on to us by Christ is the Catholic Church. I think it is ludicrous to believe that someone or some group, coming along 16 centuries or later think they can correct the constant teaching of Christ's Church because they read a translation of the book that Church created and think they know better.

 

[Augustin56]

And you have just shown how the Roman church has in many areas departed from truth and promotes its own and not Gods doctrine.

If you wish to know how and which ones, I will be happy to show you!

Ronald, all you can do is give your personal iterpretation of a translation of a book the Catholic Church gave you, and claim we are in error because we don't agree with your personal interpretation. Remember 2 Peter 1:20 says there is to be no personal interpretation of Scripture with regard to doctrine. "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation"

I think it is ludicrous to believe that someone or some group, coming along 16 centuries or later think they can correct the constant teaching of Christ's Church, the Catholic Church, because they read a translation of the book that Church created and think they know better.

 

[Augustin56]

Yes he does. But your church is not that church.

So why do you follow a church that persecutes Jesus?

They deny the power of the cross to save. and institute their own gospel of works. which is an anathema

Show me a Church apart from the Catholic Church that existed for the first 1000 years of Christianity. There are none!

The Church doesn't persecute Christ. Christ identifies as one with His Church. In Acts 9:4, Jesus addresses Saul (St. Paul by his Hebrew name) after he knocked him off his horse as he was going around persecuting the Church. "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" Note that Jesus didn't say, "...why are you persecuting My Church?" which he was actually doing, but "...why are you persecuting Me?" Christ identifies as one with His Church. Persecute Christ's Church, as you are doing with your lies about His Church, and you persecute Christ.

Before you accuse the Catholic Church of something, why not find out what they really teach, or ask, rather than listening to the lies of Satan you have been told?

 

[Piers Plowman]

Show me a Church apart from the Catholic Church that existed for the first 1000 years of Christianity. There are none!

Church of the East?

 

[Augustin56]

Church of the East?

Church of the East was part of the Catholic Church until 1054 A.D.

 

[Piers Plowman]

Church of the East was part of the Catholic Church until 1054 A.D.

Unless I'm mistaken, Council of Ephesus took place on 431 A.D.?

 

[Johann]

Unless I'm mistaken, Council of Ephesus took place on 431 A.D.?

The Council of Ephesus took place in 431 A.D. It was convened to address the controversy over the teachings of Nestorius, particularly his views on the nature of Christ and the title of Theotokos (God-bearer) for Mary. The council condemned Nestorianism and affirmed that Christ is one person with both divine and human natures, upholding the title of Theotokos for Mary.

J.

 

[Piers Plowman]

The Council of Ephesus took place in 431 A.D. It was convened to address the controversy over the teachings of Nestorius, particularly his views on the nature of Christ and the title of Theotokos (God-bearer) for Mary. The council condemned Nestorianism and affirmed that Christ is one person with both divine and human natures, upholding the title of Theotokos for Mary.

J.

Yes. And the Church of the East disagreed with the condemnation of Nestorius.

 

[Johann]

Yes. And the Church of the East disagreed with the condemnation of Nestorius.

Correct-

The Church of the East disagreed with the condemnation of Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. Nestorius, who was the Patriarch of Constantinople, taught a distinction between the divine and human natures of Christ, which the council ruled against. Specifically, he rejected the use of the title Theotokos ("God-bearer") for Mary, arguing that it improperly emphasized Christ's divinity at the expense of His humanity.

Following the condemnation of Nestorianism, many of his followers moved eastward, and the Church of the East (sometimes referred to as the Assyrian Church of the East) continued to embrace many of Nestorius's teachings. As a result, the Church of the East maintained a Christological position that was distinct from both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.

J.

 

[Piers Plowman]

Correct-

The Church of the East disagreed with the condemnation of Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. Nestorius, who was the Patriarch of Constantinople, taught a distinction between the divine and human natures of Christ, which the council ruled against. Specifically, he rejected the use of the title Theotokos ("God-bearer") for Mary, arguing that it improperly emphasized Christ's divinity at the expense of His humanity.

Following the condemnation of Nestorianism, many of his followers moved eastward, and the Church of the East (sometimes referred to as the Assyrian Church of the East) continued to embrace many of Nestorius's teachings. As a result, the Church of the East maintained a Christological position that was distinct from both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.

J.

I still am of the opinion that 'Christotokos' is a better title for Mary, personally.

 

[Johann]

I still am of the opinion that 'Christotokos' is a better title for Mary, personally.

I don't adhere to the dogmas, creeds, or sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church, nor do I consider the Early Church Fathers as my source of authority.

J.

 

[Augustin56]

Unless I'm mistaken, Council of Ephesus took place on 431 A.D.?

Correct. Council of Ephesus

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes. And the Church of the East disagreed with the condemnation of Nestorius.

So, according to you, Nestorius was correct about the nature of Jesus instead of the church that had existed from after Jesus ascended?
You believe Jesus was a god-like man instead of Jesus being God?
And you deny the Holy Trinity?

What else do you disagree with regarding the Christian faith?

Fact is, the early church had all the correct doctrines before Nestorius, Augustine, or any other person that distorted what the early Fathers believed.

This does NOT make the church of the east correct in its conclusions.

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't adhere to the dogmas, creeds, or sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church, nor do I consider the Early Church Fathers as my source of authority.

J.

Which creed do you believe is specifically Catholic??
ALL the creeds are Christian and even Protestantism is based on the creeds of the early church.
BTW, an interesting fact....that Protestantism actually has BORROWED from the Catholic Church and then spends a lot of time
criticizing it.

 

[GodsGrace]

I still am of the opinion that 'Christotokos' is a better title for Mary, personally.

Was Christ God?

 

[GodsGrace]

Like I said. you want to blindly follow people who tell you what to believe. feel free

You want to mock God and Mock the cross. Feel free.

Don;t talk to me about following my own doctrine, when you are doing the very thing your demanding I do not do.

EG, maybe some day we'll be on the same thread and could post regarding the CC.
@Augustin56 does not do what we Protestants do.... He follows what his church teaches. And with his brain.
as you very well know, we read scripture and then decide what we agree with and what we do not agree with.
This has caused many denominations...frankly, I think it's a disgrace to the Christian faith.
Who can know the truth when there are so many truths to choose from.

And re the CC:
There are many misconceptions regarding the CC.
I don't think you should dislike it as much as you do.
There are problems, yes, but I see no reason to have such harsh feeling for that church.

 

[Johann]

So, according to you, Nestorius was correct about the nature of Jesus instead of the church that had existed from after Jesus ascended?
You believe Jesus was a god-like man instead of Jesus being God?
And you deny the Holy Trinity?

What else do you disagree with regarding the Christian faith?

Fact is, the early church had all the correct doctrines before Nestorius, Augustine, or any other person that distorted what the early Fathers believed.

This does NOT make the church of the east correct in its conclusions.

Something to ponder on, as I read this--

The Role of the Early Church Fathers:
The Early Church Fathers (e.g., Irenaeus, Tertullian, Athanasius) were instrumental in forming early Christian doctrine, especially in defending the faith against heresies like Gnosticism and Arianism. Their writings were critical for the development of doctrines like the Trinity and the incarnation of Christ.

However, their teachings did not exist in a vacuum or as a fixed set of doctrines.

The Church Fathers themselves were engaged in theological debates and often disagreed with one another on certain points.

Doctrinal clarity came over time, often through councils that sought to resolve theological disputes (e.g., the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., which addressed Arianism and the nature of Christ).

4. Doctrinal Challenges and Heresies:
Even in the early centuries, various heresies and challenges to orthodox doctrine arose. For example, Gnosticism, Marcionism, and Arianism presented serious threats to early Christian beliefs. The early Church Fathers worked to defend what they understood to be the correct interpretation of Scripture, but they were still refining these ideas in response to these challenges.
Your assertion that the early Church had all the correct doctrines from the beginning might not fully recognize that theological understanding was an evolving process. Key doctrines like the Trinity and Christology were refined over time through councils and debates.

Which creed do you believe is specifically Catholic??
ALL the creeds are Christian and even Protestantism is based on the creeds of the early church.
BTW, an interesting fact....that Protestantism actually has BORROWED from the Catholic Church and then spends a lot of time
criticizing it.

I agree, the creeds like the Nicene Creed and Apostles' Creed are shared by all Christians, not just Catholics. They’re foundational statements of faith that go back to the early Church and summarize core beliefs about Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation.

But when the Protestant Reformation happened, the reformers felt that the Catholic Church had added practices and teachings over time that didn’t align with Scripture-things like purgatory, prayers to saints, and the authority of the Pope. The goal of the Reformation wasn’t to throw out everything from the past, but rather to get back to what they believed was the original biblical faith.

So yes, Protestantism does share a lot with the Catholic Church, but the differences came from wanting to refocus on what they saw as more faithful to Scripture.

J.

 

[Johann]

Ronald, all you can do is give your personal iterpretation of a translation of a book the Catholic Church gave you, and claim we are in error because we don't agree with your personal interpretation. Remember 2 Peter 1:20 says there is to be no personal interpretation of Scripture with regard to doctrine. "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation"

I think it is ludicrous to believe that someone or some group, coming along 16 centuries or later think they can correct the constant teaching of Christ's Church, the Catholic Church, because they read a translation of the book that Church created and think they know better.

I appreciate your perspective, but I think it's important to remember that many Christians believe that every believer has the right and responsibility to interpret Scripture for themselves, guided by the Holy Spirit. While the Catholic Church has certainly played a significant role in shaping Christian doctrine and preserving Scripture, we also see examples in the New Testament where early Christians were encouraged to study the Scriptures and seek understanding.

As for 2 Peter 1:20, it’s a reminder about the importance of understanding the context of Scripture and the role of the Holy Spirit in interpretation. It doesn’t necessarily mean that only one group has the authority to interpret Scripture for everyone.

In fact, many Protestant denominations believe that the principle of sola scriptura-that Scripture alone is the ultimate authority in matters of faith and practice-allows for personal interpretation, provided it aligns with the core teachings of Christianity.

So while I respect the traditions of the Catholic Church, I also think it’s possible for individuals to seek God’s truth in Scripture, even if it leads to different interpretations. Ultimately, it’s about pursuing a deeper understanding of God’s Word together.

J.