-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
W
Heh yeah I guess the brief thoughts got a bit long. This really will be a short response.
As Catholics we never believe it is ok to contradict the Bible. We don't accept the Church's teachings over and above the Bible, but rather the Church is seen as the authentic interpreter of the Scriptures. To repeat a point I made earlier, we see Jesus Christ as the fullness of Revelation and then we see the Bible and Tradition as two fonts through which that Revelation is mediated to us. Tradition and the Bible are meant to mutually support and guide one another.
Thus the difference is not between Catholics who side with the Church and Protestants who side with the Bible, it is a question of how we believe Christ desired to communicate His revelation to us through time. Did He simply leave us behind a book as a direction manual, or did He create a Church, instill it with His own Spirit, and through that Church give us Scriptures which that same Church allows us to properly understand
As Catholics we never believe it is ok to contradict the Bible. We don't accept the Church's teachings over and above the Bible, but rather the Church is seen as the authentic interpreter of the Scriptures. To repeat a point I made earlier, we see Jesus Christ as the fullness of Revelation and then we see the Bible and Tradition as two fonts through which that Revelation is mediated to us. Tradition and the Bible are meant to mutually support and guide one another.
Thus the difference is not between Catholics who side with the Church and Protestants who side with the Bible, it is a question of how we believe Christ desired to communicate His revelation to us through time. Did He simply leave us behind a book as a direction manual, or did He create a Church, instill it with His own Spirit, and through that Church give us Scriptures which that same Church allows us to properly understand
The big difference is how we describe the church. The church is the living body of believers not an organization of brick and stone. You see church as an organization and the bible teaches that the church is a living organism. The Holy Spirit is the Vicar of Christ and guides the church into the truth of Gods word.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
For the cause of Christ
Roger
W
Thanks Jim.
Yes I agree that we both agree and disagree on things hah.
I would just make one comment here. I think there is a both/and at work. So for instance, it is true that in one way redemption has occured. The scriptures speak of Christians already as New Creations. Yet at the same time certainly we have to recognize that even the hearts, minds and souls of Christians believers or still in need of further sanctification (I think Rom. 8:22-24 would get at this point).
You are correct that it won't be finished until the New Jerusalem, which I think is my point. That the redemption of creation is still being carried out. We have the duel mission of Christ and the Spirit. Christ has certainly accomplished His work, yet the Spirit still is at work to bring the fruits of Christ's victory to all of creation.
If I remember I think this whole vein of the discussion started over comments about the "finished" work of Christ and the Mass. So my original point was to show what place the Mass has in Catholic theology. Without implying any lack in what Christ has done we also recognize that what has been completed in Christ perfectly is still only slowly being applied to the rest of creation. Sorry if it seems like I am going in circles making this point over and over, but I'm just not sure I have expressed it clearly yet.
Lastly, in regards to the idea of the role of good works that would be worth talking about. I'm not sure what role you think Catholics believe they have, but we definitely take the starting point of recognizing with Paul that we have nothing that we have not received, and that it is by God's grace that we both will and do good works (Phil. 2:13). So that is our starting point, but the big picture would be that we believe that God in His essence is pure charity, total self-giving love. Since we are made in His image we are made to live according to that same manner of existence. When His grace/life/Spirit enter into us they transform our heart, mind and will and make us more and more like God; that is, the more His life enters into us the more He shapes our being to more perfectly model His own. Living a life of holiness is simply the outflowing of the presence of Christ and the Spirit at work in and through us. Of course they are not simply puppeting us, we have to co-operate through the natural powers which God has given us (intellect and will) as these powers are healed and strengthened by grace to freely obey and freely give of ourselves in a manner like Christ.
I don't know if that helps, or maybe I have misunderstood what you mean as a whole. But maybe you could let me know what you had in mind with the comment
Yes I agree that we both agree and disagree on things hah.
I would just make one comment here. I think there is a both/and at work. So for instance, it is true that in one way redemption has occured. The scriptures speak of Christians already as New Creations. Yet at the same time certainly we have to recognize that even the hearts, minds and souls of Christians believers or still in need of further sanctification (I think Rom. 8:22-24 would get at this point).
You are correct that it won't be finished until the New Jerusalem, which I think is my point. That the redemption of creation is still being carried out. We have the duel mission of Christ and the Spirit. Christ has certainly accomplished His work, yet the Spirit still is at work to bring the fruits of Christ's victory to all of creation.
If I remember I think this whole vein of the discussion started over comments about the "finished" work of Christ and the Mass. So my original point was to show what place the Mass has in Catholic theology. Without implying any lack in what Christ has done we also recognize that what has been completed in Christ perfectly is still only slowly being applied to the rest of creation. Sorry if it seems like I am going in circles making this point over and over, but I'm just not sure I have expressed it clearly yet.
Lastly, in regards to the idea of the role of good works that would be worth talking about. I'm not sure what role you think Catholics believe they have, but we definitely take the starting point of recognizing with Paul that we have nothing that we have not received, and that it is by God's grace that we both will and do good works (Phil. 2:13). So that is our starting point, but the big picture would be that we believe that God in His essence is pure charity, total self-giving love. Since we are made in His image we are made to live according to that same manner of existence. When His grace/life/Spirit enter into us they transform our heart, mind and will and make us more and more like God; that is, the more His life enters into us the more He shapes our being to more perfectly model His own. Living a life of holiness is simply the outflowing of the presence of Christ and the Spirit at work in and through us. Of course they are not simply puppeting us, we have to co-operate through the natural powers which God has given us (intellect and will) as these powers are healed and strengthened by grace to freely obey and freely give of ourselves in a manner like Christ.
I don't know if that helps, or maybe I have misunderstood what you mean as a whole. But maybe you could let me know what you had in mind with the comment
W
I think if you were to read Lumen Gentium, the most recent document in which the Church explains herself, you would see that that isn't accurate. It speaks of the various images of the Church such as the Body of Christ, and the People of God etc.
We would also agree about the Holy Spirit being the guide of the Church, I think we just disagree about which Church it is that He is guiding and how He has chosen to guide it; that is, through a unified structured organization of apostolic hierarchy working with the laity, which would be the Catholic position, and what I take to be the Protestant position wherein the multitude of believers each interpret by themselves.
We would also agree about the Holy Spirit being the guide of the Church, I think we just disagree about which Church it is that He is guiding and how He has chosen to guide it; that is, through a unified structured organization of apostolic hierarchy working with the laity, which would be the Catholic position, and what I take to be the Protestant position wherein the multitude of believers each interpret by themselves.
W
Magenta could you help me understand by maybe pointing to the actual historical examples you are referencing?
Most speficially I would like to know when you believe the "original" canon was made and how, as well as when the "new" canon was made by the Catholic Church. If you could clarify that would be great
Most speficially I would like to know when you believe the "original" canon was made and how, as well as when the "new" canon was made by the Catholic Church. If you could clarify that would be great
How true, and it has always been so. When the Jews were exiled to Babylon they didn't have the temple so they did the best they could. First, they met in houses then they built the brick and stone. God did not direct them. They called them synagogues and then the men in charge they called rabbi. Like the Catholic Church, they were just doing the best they could without God's direction. Then, like the Catholic Church gave their pope great authority, they gave the rabbi authority. What the rabbi did resulted in the Pharisees that we criticize today.
The first organized church was called The Way, we say it is the age of the apostles. It was closest to Christ. The head of this organization was always a Christian Jew, the brother of Christ one of the first ones. They were all men who not only had a knowledge of Christ but of scripture. In AD132 the results of the Bar Kokhba revolt killed the Jews in Jerusalem and the gentiles took over church leadership. They did not have a scripture background but a pagan one and they began adding pagan ideas to our church. Sunday worship, Easter that isn't in scripture, Christmas isn't either, Gnostic ideas, etc. Constantine made these a legal part of government.
By AD500 The Way was forgotten. The Catholic Church had yearly councils that we can still read the reports of. It is interesting reading when it is compared to scripture. Scripture was changed. There is a remnant that has found their way back to only scripture, but they are being torn up with being accused of many things, such as following rituals because they study them to find the true principles of the Lord----they follow the Holy Spirit to those principles not the rituals. There is a huge outcry against this remnant.
The first organized church was called The Way, we say it is the age of the apostles. It was closest to Christ. The head of this organization was always a Christian Jew, the brother of Christ one of the first ones. They were all men who not only had a knowledge of Christ but of scripture. In AD132 the results of the Bar Kokhba revolt killed the Jews in Jerusalem and the gentiles took over church leadership. They did not have a scripture background but a pagan one and they began adding pagan ideas to our church. Sunday worship, Easter that isn't in scripture, Christmas isn't either, Gnostic ideas, etc. Constantine made these a legal part of government.
By AD500 The Way was forgotten. The Catholic Church had yearly councils that we can still read the reports of. It is interesting reading when it is compared to scripture. Scripture was changed. There is a remnant that has found their way back to only scripture, but they are being torn up with being accused of many things, such as following rituals because they study them to find the true principles of the Lord----they follow the Holy Spirit to those principles not the rituals. There is a huge outcry against this remnant.
If we each didn't do our own interpretation, how would we ever argue about anything.!!
Actually there's
Sola scripture and
Solo scripture.
I refer to the second. It can also be called eisegesis.
33,000 churches and counting.
Some don't even u derstand what apostolic succession is.
It's like not agreeing with History!
Actually there's
Sola scripture and
Solo scripture.
I refer to the second. It can also be called eisegesis.
33,000 churches and counting.
Some don't even u derstand what apostolic succession is.
It's like not agreeing with History!
God deals with each and every soul on an individual basis. God is never too busy to guide and direct His child. God does His work one to one and does not operate through any earthly hierarchy. There is no apostolic hierarchy and no apostolic succession that is pure nonsense. God entrusts the care of His church to no one but Himself.
Every soul must deal with the matter of sin and salvation on an individual basis and each will be judged on an individual basis. Both saved and unsaved face their Creator God and give account. Believers have the Holy Spirit abiding within them and the rest have no hope.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Every soul must deal with the matter of sin and salvation on an individual basis and each will be judged on an individual basis. Both saved and unsaved face their Creator God and give account. Believers have the Holy Spirit abiding within them and the rest have no hope.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Just for CatholicsANSWERS | HOME
30,000 Protestant Denominations?
Question: If one thing is clear, it's that there is one, single, visible Church that Jesus founded. This multitude of competing, conflicting denominations is no sign of God's work; therefore, it must be the work of the Evil One. Somewhere in the midst of these 30,000 denominations, there is one true church, and the rest are in sin and rebellion.
Answer: The "thousands-of-denominations" argument is very often employed to prove all sorts of things. Here are some citations from letters received from other Catholics:
How can all these denominations claim to follow the Bible yet all come to different conclusions? How can I possibly know which one of those above teach the truth when they can't even agree on what the Bible says? The Bible alone has created so much havoc in this world.
If there is only one Church, why are there so many Protestant denominations? Possibly many thousands throughout the world, as compared to only one Catholic Church? I do see it as a sign of God's judgment that there are close to 30,000 Protestant denominations.
The Bible alone can be dangerous. In fact, the Bible alone IS dangerous. Look at Protestantism: 100,000 different interpretation of the Bible, 100,000 contradictions, 100,000 different denominations claiming to have the key.
Peter said that no prophecy of the Scripture is for private interpretation. This is why you have 30,000 different Protestant denominations that all believe differently from one another. This alone should give you a clue that Protestantism is not the true Church of Jesus Christ.
So, the existence of many Protestant denominations supposedly proves that the Sola Scriptura is dangerous, that we should not try to understand the Bible for ourselves, that the church of Rome is the one true church, and of course, all the other churches are false.
Elsewhere I have written on the significance of the heterogeneity among Christians. (See That They May Be One and Disagreement among Protestants). Here I simply want to make one important addition, namely, that the allegation so often repeated by Catholic apologists that there are 20,000 to 30,000 Protestant denominations is simply FALSE . . . not to mention the double standard employed, for the Roman Church is not exactly united. There are untold factions and divisions, and diverse understanding of doctrine within Catholic groups and by different Catholic theologians and individuals.
In an article entitled "30,000 Protestant Denominations?", Evangelical apologist Eric Svendsen exposes the falsehood of this fabrication. Briefly:
Svendsen shows that the source of this figure is the World Christian Encyclopedia (David A. Barrett; Oxford University Press, 1982).
Barrett cites a figure of 20,780 denominations. However not all of them are Protestants. According to Barrett, Protestants account for 8,196 (and incidentally, Roman Catholics account for 223).
However, even this figure of eight thousand Protestant denominations is misleading, for Barrett defines "distinct denominations" as any group that might have a slightly different emphasis than another group. The distinction is made on the basis of jurisdiction, rather than differing beliefs and practices.
Barrett breaks down the Protestant bloc into twenty-one major "traditions" which are much closer to what we usually mean by the word "denominations." It is interesting that Roman Catholics are subdivided into sixteen such "traditions."
Svendsen concludes, "In short, Roman Catholic apologists have hurriedly, carelessly - and, as a result, irresponsibly - glanced at Barrett's work, found a large number (22,189), and arrived at all sorts of absurdities that Barrett never concluded." - The Lie of 30000 Protestant Denominations
30,000 Protestant Denominations?
Question: If one thing is clear, it's that there is one, single, visible Church that Jesus founded. This multitude of competing, conflicting denominations is no sign of God's work; therefore, it must be the work of the Evil One. Somewhere in the midst of these 30,000 denominations, there is one true church, and the rest are in sin and rebellion.
Answer: The "thousands-of-denominations" argument is very often employed to prove all sorts of things. Here are some citations from letters received from other Catholics:
How can all these denominations claim to follow the Bible yet all come to different conclusions? How can I possibly know which one of those above teach the truth when they can't even agree on what the Bible says? The Bible alone has created so much havoc in this world.
If there is only one Church, why are there so many Protestant denominations? Possibly many thousands throughout the world, as compared to only one Catholic Church? I do see it as a sign of God's judgment that there are close to 30,000 Protestant denominations.
The Bible alone can be dangerous. In fact, the Bible alone IS dangerous. Look at Protestantism: 100,000 different interpretation of the Bible, 100,000 contradictions, 100,000 different denominations claiming to have the key.
Peter said that no prophecy of the Scripture is for private interpretation. This is why you have 30,000 different Protestant denominations that all believe differently from one another. This alone should give you a clue that Protestantism is not the true Church of Jesus Christ.
So, the existence of many Protestant denominations supposedly proves that the Sola Scriptura is dangerous, that we should not try to understand the Bible for ourselves, that the church of Rome is the one true church, and of course, all the other churches are false.
Elsewhere I have written on the significance of the heterogeneity among Christians. (See That They May Be One and Disagreement among Protestants). Here I simply want to make one important addition, namely, that the allegation so often repeated by Catholic apologists that there are 20,000 to 30,000 Protestant denominations is simply FALSE . . . not to mention the double standard employed, for the Roman Church is not exactly united. There are untold factions and divisions, and diverse understanding of doctrine within Catholic groups and by different Catholic theologians and individuals.
In an article entitled "30,000 Protestant Denominations?", Evangelical apologist Eric Svendsen exposes the falsehood of this fabrication. Briefly:
Svendsen shows that the source of this figure is the World Christian Encyclopedia (David A. Barrett; Oxford University Press, 1982).
Barrett cites a figure of 20,780 denominations. However not all of them are Protestants. According to Barrett, Protestants account for 8,196 (and incidentally, Roman Catholics account for 223).
However, even this figure of eight thousand Protestant denominations is misleading, for Barrett defines "distinct denominations" as any group that might have a slightly different emphasis than another group. The distinction is made on the basis of jurisdiction, rather than differing beliefs and practices.
Barrett breaks down the Protestant bloc into twenty-one major "traditions" which are much closer to what we usually mean by the word "denominations." It is interesting that Roman Catholics are subdivided into sixteen such "traditions."
Svendsen concludes, "In short, Roman Catholic apologists have hurriedly, carelessly - and, as a result, irresponsibly - glanced at Barrett's work, found a large number (22,189), and arrived at all sorts of absurdities that Barrett never concluded." - The Lie of 30000 Protestant Denominations
W
Yes certainly every individual is responsible for themself before God, and no one else can take their place in that regard. Here I agree. And most definitely you are right about God's intimate care for every individual, He has counted each of our hairs, so no question there either.
But certainly we have to recognize the role of the community also right? Do we not affirm that through the whole of the Scriptures God's desire has always been to form a family of believers that would spread to all nations of the earth? Did He not form the community of Israel? And is not the Church the New Israel? I think love is personal but not individualistic. People made in the image of a Triune God need community in order to properly live out our humanity and our call to love. We are inescapably social beings. And after Pentecost we don't see people running off to live their own private Christianity but rather we see the community of believers coming together to live in "one mind and one heart" (Acts 4:32). It is also said that this community "dedicated themselves to the apostles teaching and to fellowship" (Acts 2:42). Through the whole of the Acts of the Apostles we see the Apostles leading and guiding the Church.
We also have statements such as "his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ" (Eph. 4:11). As well as "you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church" (Matt. 16:18).
It seems that through the whole of God's actions in salvation history He has always worked in and through a community with leaders that He appoints. To me this seems to be the Biblical model. It obviouosly does not negate the fact that God is always the leader and guide and power of His Church, but He seems to be the one who has chosen to work through human beings as His instruments. Again, we all believe that He did this through the prophets as well as in the writings of the scriptures, so human agency guided by the Spirit is not a foreign belief to any Christian
I would be interested to hear the biblical explanation of your position as well
But certainly we have to recognize the role of the community also right? Do we not affirm that through the whole of the Scriptures God's desire has always been to form a family of believers that would spread to all nations of the earth? Did He not form the community of Israel? And is not the Church the New Israel? I think love is personal but not individualistic. People made in the image of a Triune God need community in order to properly live out our humanity and our call to love. We are inescapably social beings. And after Pentecost we don't see people running off to live their own private Christianity but rather we see the community of believers coming together to live in "one mind and one heart" (Acts 4:32). It is also said that this community "dedicated themselves to the apostles teaching and to fellowship" (Acts 2:42). Through the whole of the Acts of the Apostles we see the Apostles leading and guiding the Church.
We also have statements such as "his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ" (Eph. 4:11). As well as "you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church" (Matt. 16:18).
It seems that through the whole of God's actions in salvation history He has always worked in and through a community with leaders that He appoints. To me this seems to be the Biblical model. It obviouosly does not negate the fact that God is always the leader and guide and power of His Church, but He seems to be the one who has chosen to work through human beings as His instruments. Again, we all believe that He did this through the prophets as well as in the writings of the scriptures, so human agency guided by the Spirit is not a foreign belief to any Christian
I would be interested to hear the biblical explanation of your position as well
W
I am not particularly interested in arguing for exact numbers, I would simply say that even if we accept 8,196 denominations that is still 8,195 denominations more than Jesus prayed for in the Garden in John 17.
To answer your point about varieties within Catholicism I think we have to make a distinction first between the official teachings of the Church and the opinions of Catholic theologians. The Church has maintained a unity of official proclaimed doctrine through the whole of her history. If particular theologians disagree with that doctrine it only means that in that regard they are not truly Catholic. I can wear a Mexico t-shirt all I want, but if I was born and raised my whole life in America I am not Mexican. People can take the title of being Catholic, but to be a true Catholic means to be in union with the official teachings of the Church.
There are also differences in opinions regarding non-essential or speculative matters, and believe me, yes there are plenty of these. But this does not affect the unity of the Church's one proclamation of belief through the ages
That is certainly not true. This page will show some of the changing doctrines and traditions within the heretical church of the RCC: LIST OF CATHOLIC HERESIES And HUMAN TRADITIONS
The church is not the new Israel. God chose to use Israel because Israel was insignificant among the nations. Rome desire to be great among the nations. Not exactly a demonstration of the Spirit of God.
Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
God established the family unit to be the example not a great central church or temple unit. God did not command Israel to build a temple but Israel who is renown for it's arrogance demanded it of God.
The call to evangelize is to individuals not to centralized organizations protestant or catholic.
Very few church groups can remain true to the Lord if they grow to more than 100-150 people in size. You repeat your error of Mat 16:18 in that the church is built on Jesus Christ and not Peter. Eph. 4:11 God gifts men of ability to teach and preach to those small assemblies that are faithful to the word of God. From these small groups God raises up men to go to the mission fields and to travel to do the work of an evangelist.
There remains no excuse or plausible explanation for bloated organizations like the catholic church. The lust for power and the need to dominate ones fellow man drives men to create organizations like romanism.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
God established the family unit to be the example not a great central church or temple unit. God did not command Israel to build a temple but Israel who is renown for it's arrogance demanded it of God.
The call to evangelize is to individuals not to centralized organizations protestant or catholic.
Very few church groups can remain true to the Lord if they grow to more than 100-150 people in size. You repeat your error of Mat 16:18 in that the church is built on Jesus Christ and not Peter. Eph. 4:11 God gifts men of ability to teach and preach to those small assemblies that are faithful to the word of God. From these small groups God raises up men to go to the mission fields and to travel to do the work of an evangelist.
There remains no excuse or plausible explanation for bloated organizations like the catholic church. The lust for power and the need to dominate ones fellow man drives men to create organizations like romanism.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
You are too kind... I so look forward to the world to come, for this world is exceedingly sinful, and evil abounds among those who spread the falsehoods of the RCC that translate into spiritual abuse. Jesus said it would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck, so serious are the offenses they commit, and repeatedly defend.