Why water into wine?

[BreadOfLife]

YEs please do, I have read many and not one paints the RC church in good light.

The point is that you argue with a lot of blind rage - but no actual historical FACTS.

You make stupid claims like "the Catholic Church didn't declare the Canon - they just took the existing canon and perverted it."
This is the most asinine claim a person could make in a Christian debate forum. The historical facts obliterate this moronic argument.

Tell me something:
WHERE did the Bible come from?
WHO wrote it?
WHO compiled it and declared the Canon of the New Testament?
WHY do you Protestants follow this Canon of the New Testament?

This should be interesting . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

My argument, as you have just proven, with all your examples, is that the Roman Church was not the primary church in Scripture. It never had the lead. If any church did it would have been the church at Antioch. That was the church Paul always went back to and reported to.

I admit the Roman church later gained control over all the churches and christians. That is however a wrong control.

All those individual churches mentioned in the Scriptures and the risen Jesus Christ when giving His revelation to John, never said a word about Peter or the authority of the Roman church over these churches. And He had both good and bad things to say about them. Makes you wonder why....but not really.

Stranger

And, as I have explained ad nauseam - The Seven churches spoken of in Revelation are the parishes in ASIA.
Not sure why this is such a difficult point for you to grasp. NONE of the other parishes are mentioned.
Not Jerusalem.
Not Antioch.
Not Corinth
Not Thessalonica.
Not Philippi.
NONE of them - so why should Rome be mentioned?? Rome is not in Asia - it's in Europe.

When do YOU believe the Bishop or Rome became the leader of the earthly Church?
I eagerly await your reply . . .

 

[mjrhealth]

The point is that you argue with a lot of blind rage - but no actual historical FACTS.

You make stupid claims like "the Catholic Church didn't declare the Canon - they just took the existing canon and perverted it."
This is the most asinine claim a person could make in a Christian debate forum. The historical facts obliterate this moronic argument.

Tell me something:
WHERE did the Bible come from?
WHO wrote it?
WHO compiled it and declared the Canon of the New Testament?
WHY do you Protestants follow this Canon of the New Testament?

This should be interesting .

Run out of rants have we, the catholic church doesnt not own God, neither did it write the text that went into teh bible, they simply compiled a bunch of texts into a book, and even that the couldnt get right, corrupted it, wouldnt allow teh laity to read it to discover the truth nor Jesus for them selves, murdered any one who tried to put it into English, even you now according to your churches doctrines should be handing your bible in for you by its own rulings are not allowed to read it, that makes you a Heretic by your churches own laws and should be burned at the steak for seeking Jesus for yourself. Such a lovely church its all so black and red, black from the charred bones of those that stood up and opposed her and red from the blood ofs the saints she has murdered over the centuries, and you tell us she id Godly, Who is your God??

Again you do not own God, He doesnt need your religion to save anyone.

 

[amadeus]

It's not about ME being right - it's about Christ's Church is right.

And this is where we definitely differ. It is also not about me being right. God is right. I want to be on His side. The Church is growing but until it is fully grown it is missing some things. Any part of it that is not growing [individuals or groups] is stagnating and dying.
From the Church will come the Bride of Christ which is part of the Body, but not all of the Body.

There is some pruning going on and for some the end result will be to be thrown into the fire because of no fruit. I don't decide whose dead and whose not. Unbelievers who have never found Christ are certainly dead, but they never had life. Believers are another thing, but God knows them all and is fair. Some will not agree with or like His fairness.

The ideas that YOU are espousing are relatively new in the span of Christian history. As I stated before - even your Protestant Fathers didn't believe what you are saying. They held strongly to the belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

No, the ideas I am presenting are not new. Early on when one with such ideas or beliefs was discovered by the formal church, whether it were Catholic or Protestant, the result was often persecution and death unless the person would conform.

Isn't that what happened to Jesus?

Some of them were branded heretics by the formal church[es] and on some of them writings may be found in men's books. Others probably are now known only to God.

Think about it - the rejection of the Real Presence came about over 1500 years after the dawn of the Church. YOU reject it based on your own "feeling" - but not on the language in which the text proof was written. Yes, God peaks to our hearts - but through an understanding of His Word. If two people understand it differently - then, at least ONE of them is wrong.

Two people with different beliefs on some things may both be saved if both of their hearts are right with God. Go back and read again I Corinthians chapter 13. As people grow toward God, they will approach each other more closely as well. The measurement in the end is made by God because only He knows what is in every heart, without the often overzealous regard of men for points of doctrine. Doctrine is important, but it is secondary to charity [love]. Too many supposed believers too not acknowledge or understand that.

The unanimity of this belief in the Early Church IS important because it shows the consistency f this teaching. The Apostles taught it to their congregations, who taught it to theirs and so on.

Yes, I believe that there is and always has been since Jesus initiated his Church in people what has been called a scarlet thread of truth in believers. This does not mean however that that thread has always coincided with the primary teachings of any formal church, Catholic or Protestant.

Was Jesus joking when he told His Apostles that the Holy Spirit would guide His Church to ALL truth (John 16:12-15) and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Matt. 16:18)?

Again here we part ways. The Catholic church says that many such verses were not written to all believers. I disagree. The leading of the Holy Ghost is for me and for each person who has received the gift. Only by following the lead of the Holy Ghost can we grow closer to God. Specific ministers such as those designated in Eph 4:11 have a purpose, but this does not remove a burden from believers who are not given such gifts.

People bicker over differences in what the Holy Spirit says to them because nearly everyone too often quenches the Holy Spirit of God and often unknowingly mix God's truth with their own conclusions. This would also be true for leaders in the old or new church groups. I would include Catholicism in this.

 

[Stranger]

And, as I have explained ad nauseam - The Seven churches spoken of in Revelation are the parishes in ASIA.
Not sure why this is such a difficult point for you to grasp. NONE of the other parishes are mentioned.
Not Jerusalem.
Not Antioch.
Not Corinth
Not Thessalonica.
Not Philippi.
NONE of them - so why should Rome be mentioned?? Rome is not in Asia - it's in Europe.

When do YOU believe the Bishop or Rome became the leader of the earthly Church?
I eagerly await your reply . . .

So, are you saying there are churches that Rome is not over? That there are churches that Rome does not have any authority over? That the pope does not have any authority over? List these for me.

Nothing is said in Scripture of the other churches not mentioned, of the Roman Church ever being over them in authority. Exactly right, Rome should not be mentioned because Rome had no authority over any other churches. According to Scripture.

Irregardless of the date when Rome took over the church historically, it isn't given that authority in Scripture. Are you still 'eager'?

Stranger

 

[aspen]

Doctrine at the expense of people is the fast lane to Hell.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And this is where we definitely differ. It is also not about me being right. God is right. I want to be on His side. The Church is growing but until it is fully grown it is missing some things. Any part of it that is not growing [individuals or groups] is stagnating and dying.
From the Church will come the Bride of Christ which is part of the Body, but not all of the Body.

There is some pruning going on and for some the end result will be to be thrown into the fire because of no fruit. I don't decide whose dead and whose not. Unbelievers who have never found Christ are certainly dead, but they never had life. Believers are another thing, but God knows them all and is fair. Some will not agree with or like His fairness.

No, the ideas I am presenting are not new. Early on when one with such ideas or beliefs was discovered by the formal church, whether it were Catholic or Protestant, the result was often persecution and death unless the person would conform.

Isn't that what happened to Jesus?

Some of them were branded heretics by the formal church[es] and on some of them writings may be found in men's books. Others probably are now known only to God.

Two people with different beliefs on some things may both be saved if both of their hearts are right with God. Go back and read again I Corinthians chapter 13. As people grow toward God, they will approach each other more closely as well. The measurement in the end is made by God because only He knows what is in every heart, without the often overzealous regard of men for points of doctrine. Doctrine is important, but it is secondary to charity [love]. Too many supposed believers too not acknowledge or understand that.

Yes, I believe that there is and always has been since Jesus initiated his Church in people what has been called a scarlet thread of truth in believers. This does not mean however that that thread has always coincided with the primary teachings of any formal church, Catholic or Protestant.

Again here we part ways. The Catholic church says that many such verses were not written to all believers. I disagree. The leading of the Holy Ghost is for me and for each person who has received the gift. Only by following the lead of the Holy Ghost can we grow closer to God. Specific ministers such as those designated in Eph 4:11 have a purpose, but this does not remove a burden from believers who are not given such gifts.

People bicker over differences in what the Holy Spirit says to them because nearly everyone too often quenches the Holy Spirit of God and often unknowingly mix God's truth with their own conclusions. This would also be true for leaders in the old or new church groups. I would include Catholicism in this.

Unfortunately, Amadeus - YOUR idea about what the Church is does not coincide with the Bible's definition.
The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
It is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
Jesus compares His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).

How can something that is described as being the FULLNESS of Christ be "missing some things"?
Failure to submit to the teachings of Christ's Church is failure to submit to HIM (Luke 10:16).

You can continue with your novel ideas about what you think the Bible teaches - but Jesus left us with the Authority of the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).
He didn't leave us with a Book as our sole Authority.

PS - You still haven't told me why Protestants believe differently about the Eucharist and other doctrines than their Protestant Fathers.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Run out of rants have we, the catholic church doesnt not own God, neither did it write the text that went into teh bible, they simply compiled a bunch of texts into a book, and even that the couldnt get right, corrupted it, wouldnt allow teh laity to read it to discover the truth nor Jesus for them selves, murdered any one who tried to put it into English, even you now according to your churches doctrines should be handing your bible in for you by its own rulings are not allowed to read it, that makes you a Heretic by your churches own laws and should be burned at the steak for seeking Jesus for yourself. Such a lovely church its all so black and red, black from the charred bones of those that stood up and opposed her and red from the blood ofs the saints she has murdered over the centuries, and you tell us she id Godly, Who is your God??

Again you do not own God, He doesnt need your religion to save anyone.

No, the Church doesn't "own" God.
It is simply His supreme Authority on earth (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Like I said - just a rudimentary study of history shows that you're wrong. The Bible was compiled and declared Canon my the Catholic Church - and NO amount of whining can change that.

Jesus warns people like YOU about rejecting His Church . . .
Luke 10:16
The one who hears YOU hears ME, and the one who rejects YOU rejects ME, and the one who rejects ME rejects HIM who sent me.”

 

[Marymog]

Run out of rants have we, the catholic church doesnt not own God, neither did it write the text that went into teh bible, they simply compiled a bunch of texts into a book, and even that the couldnt get right, corrupted it, wouldnt allow teh laity to read it to discover the truth nor Jesus for them selves, murdered any one who tried to put it into English, even you now according to your churches doctrines should be handing your bible in for you by its own rulings are not allowed to read it, that makes you a Heretic by your churches own laws and should be burned at the steak for seeking Jesus for yourself. Such a lovely church its all so black and red, black from the charred bones of those that stood up and opposed her and red from the blood ofs the saints she has murdered over the centuries, and you tell us she id Godly, Who is your God??

Again you do not own God, He doesnt need your religion to save anyone.

Hi mrhealth,

Who was murdered for trying to translate the bible into English?

Curious Mary

 

[BreadOfLife]

So, are you saying there are churches that Rome is not over? That there are churches that Rome does not have any authority over? That the pope does not have any authority over? List these for me.

Nothing is said in Scripture of the other churches not mentioned, of the Roman Church ever being over them in authority. Exactly right, Rome should not be mentioned because Rome had no authority over any other churches. According to Scripture.

Irregardless of the date when Rome took over the church historically, it isn't given that authority in Scripture. Are you still 'eager'?

Stranger

Your refusal - or inability - to answer the question about when the Bishop of Rome became the earthly head of the Church speaks VOLUMES about your ignorance of Scripture and history.

And for the 9th or 10th time - the 7 Churches of Revelation are the Churches in ASIA.
Not sure why that simple fact hasn't penetrated your skull yet . . .

 

[amadeus]

Unfortunately, Amadeus - YOUR idea about what the Church is does not coincide with the Bible's definition.
The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
It is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
Jesus compares His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).

How can something that is described as being the FULLNESS of Christ be "missing some things"?
Failure to submit to the teachings of Christ's Church is failure to submit to HIM (Luke 10:16).

Jesus was only the Head. His Body is the people who will be all of the parts as per I Corinthians 12 written by Paul. The Head was ready to take its place when he had overcome the world [John 16:33] and when he spoke the words on the cross, "It is finished" [John 19:30]. What is missing the fullness of the Body, the individual parts which have not yet also "finished" their work as did the Head. The parts must of course submit to the Head for it to be the complete Body of Christ.

You can continue with your novel ideas about what you think the Bible teaches - but Jesus left us with the Authority of the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).
He didn't leave us with a Book as our sole Authority.

No, the Holy Spirit is here to lead us.

PS -

You still haven't told me why Protestants believe differently about the Eucharist and other doctrines than their Protestant Fathers.

Do they? I believe differently that you do and differently than others [Catholics and Protestants] do on this issue today. You believe that the way I believe it is a new thing. I do not. It was always there and some were always aware of it. Some were persecuted by others and even killed for standing behind a different belief than the leadership of the official churches [Catholic and/or Protestant]. Many of those killed probably have no written history of their story based on their beliefs. This does not mean they never existed. It does not mean that they were wrong.

I do not expect you to agree with me because I believe that only God will give an increase in this or in anything worthwhile to anyone. We need to acknowledge the words of John the Baptist here:

"He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

John was speaking of the same old man and new man of which the apostle Paul was to write later.

We are not all of us believers in exactly the same place at any given point in our lives, but if we really believe in who Jesus is, we are all heading toward the goal.

 

[Stranger]

Your refusal - or inability - to answer the question about when the Bishop of Rome became the earthly head of the Church speaks VOLUMES about your ignorance of Scripture and history.

And for the 9th or 10th time - the 7 Churches of Revelation are the Churches in ASIA.
Not sure why that simple fact hasn't penetrated your skull yet . . .

According to Scripture the bishop of Rome never became the head of the Church. According to history, who knows? It all depends on whose history your reading.

Yes, the 7 churches of Asia. No pope or Roman authority. Again, one must wonder why? I mean if the pope is the head and authority is in Rome, and Jesus is giving out warning to these churches, why isn't he addressing the pope or Rome? Chain of command would demand it.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

According to Scripture the bishop of Rome never became the head of the Church. According to history, who knows? It all depends on whose history your reading.

Yes, the 7 churches of Asia. No pope or Roman authority. Again, one must wonder why? I mean if the pope is the head and authority is in Rome, and Jesus is giving out warning to these churches, why isn't he addressing the pope or Rome? Chain of command would demand it.

Stranger

Why??
Why would Jesus HAVE to mention the Church in Rome if He is scolding 6 parishes and praising another? The Church in Rome would ONLY be mentioned if they led the others away from the truth.

Anyway - your first line that "According to Scripture the bishop of Rome never became the head of the Church" is false. According to which Scripture verse(s).

Can you show me the verse that says Peter WASN'T the earthly head of the Church. There is FAR more Scriptural evidence to show that Peter WAS the Head.

Chapter and verse, please . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Jesus was only the Head. His Body is the people who will be all of the parts as per I Corinthians 12 written by Paul. The Head was ready to take its place when he had overcome the world [John 16:33] and when he spoke the words on the cross, "It is finished" [John 19:30]. What is missing the fullness of the Body, the individual parts which have not yet also "finished" their work as did the Head. The parts must of course submit to the Head for it to be the complete Body of Christ.

Sooo, Eph. 1:22-23 is a LIE??
Is that what you're saying?? The Church is NOT the Fullness of Christ??

Where do you get off making this claim??

No, the Holy Spirit is here to lead us.

Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would lead His Church to ALL Truth. Not SOME truth - but ALL truth.

HOWEVER, He also told His Apostles that WHATEVER His Church ordained on earth would also be ordained in Heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23). He didn't say SOME or MOST of what it ordained - but WHATEVER it ordained. This is supreme earthly Authority - and THIS is why the Church is the Fullness of Christ.


Do they? I believe differently that you do and differently than others [Catholics and Protestants] do on this issue today. You believe that the way I believe it is a new thing. I do not. It was always there and some were always aware of it. Some were persecuted by others and even killed for standing behind a different belief than the leadership of the official churches [Catholic and/or Protestant]. Many of those killed probably have no written history of their story based on their beliefs. This does not mean they never existed. It does not mean that they were wrong.

I do not expect you to agree with me because I believe that only God will give an increase in this or in anything worthwhile to anyone. We need to acknowledge the words of John the Baptist here:

"He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

John was speaking of the same old man and new man of which the apostle Paul was to write later.

We are not all of us believers in exactly the same place at any given point in our lives, but if we really believe in who Jesus is, we are all heading toward the goal.[/QUOTE]
With all due respect - this strikes me as yet another dodge.

The plain historical facts are that the majority of the so-called "Reformers" held to a deep belief in the Real Presence.
Why is it that their ecclesial descendants don't??

It's a simple question.

 

[mjrhealth]

Like I said - just a rudimentary study of history shows that you're wrong. The Bible was compiled and declared Canon my the Catholic Church - and NO amount of whining can change that.

and that means what?, you never wrote the text, you dont own them and as you see my post before, it was "your" church that with held them from the public, and killed anyone who read or published them. I wouldnt be so proud of your church.

 

[mjrhealth]

Hi mrhealth,

Who was murdered for trying to translate the bible into English?

Curious Mary

since you asked
https://www.scionofzion.com/mcr.htm
Murdered by the Church of Rome

 

[bbyrd009]

zing

 

[aspen]

since you asked
Murdered by the Church of Rome

List of Catholic martyrs of the English Reformation - Wikipedia

Also, if a member of one of the following groups posted here, you would call them what they are; heretics

Donatists - 4/5th centuries - They believed a church was for the saved only - They were persecuted upon the instigation of Augustine.

Albigenses - 12/13th centuries - Rejected Rome and placed new Testament above all the traditions and teachings of Rome

Waldensians - 11/17th centuries - Many different violent persecutions against these Believers who had the Bible handed down to them as early as the 2nd century. The cave of Castelluzzo saw the murder of hundreds of Waldensian mothers and children in 1209.

But, to make your point, you embrace them as Christian

 

[Marymog]

since you asked
Murdered by the Church of Rome

The questions was, Who was murdered for trying to translate the bible into English?

You made the statement, now back it up.

Curious Mary

 

[mjrhealth]

The questions was, Who was murdered for trying to translate the bible into English?

You made the statement, now back it up.

Curious Mary

I gave you a list was it not enough....

Your whole religion is built on teh blood of our Lords people,