Catholicism vs Protestantism
- Thread starter Roughsoul1991
- Start date
-
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.
oh yes, all requirements in the Bible are significant!
at the same time, is it a good idea to read some parts of the Bible very carefully and closely, and other parts very freely and openly?
imo, that approach would allow the reader to make the Bible say whatever they wish.
The situation reminds me of
the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires. 13Nothing in all creation is hidden from God. Everything is naked and exposed before his eyes, and he is the one to whom we are accountable.
https://biblehub.com/nlt/hebrews/4.htm
at the same time, is it a good idea to read some parts of the Bible very carefully and closely, and other parts very freely and openly?
imo, that approach would allow the reader to make the Bible say whatever they wish.
The situation reminds me of
the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires. 13Nothing in all creation is hidden from God. Everything is naked and exposed before his eyes, and he is the one to whom we are accountable.
https://biblehub.com/nlt/hebrews/4.htm
I think what I was talking about there was the idea that if a person looks at a passage regarding slavery in the Bible and decides to interpret it loosely, doesn't it make sense then to interpret the entire Bible loosely?
I think it's actually a good idea to interpret those parts of the scriptures that refer to slavery loosely,
to see them more about the general idea of respecting authority.
but then, is it a good idea to look at a different passage and decide it must be applied word-for-word?
hundreds of years ago, I've read, most Christians supported the idea of slavery.
a few opposed it, but they were outliers.
today, virtually all Christians oppose slavery.
I think this is an example of how the holy Spirit does not allow the body of Christ as a whole to remain in error.
I think it's actually a good idea to interpret those parts of the scriptures that refer to slavery loosely,
to see them more about the general idea of respecting authority.
but then, is it a good idea to look at a different passage and decide it must be applied word-for-word?
hundreds of years ago, I've read, most Christians supported the idea of slavery.
a few opposed it, but they were outliers.
today, virtually all Christians oppose slavery.
I think this is an example of how the holy Spirit does not allow the body of Christ as a whole to remain in error.
apology accepted.
I think some things in history are facts, like that there was a Roman empire.
other things would be opinions, like Julius Caesar being a great emperor.
if a person says it is a fact that the Catholic Church corrupted the words of Jesus, then it's good if they have a standard to use to compare the teachings of the Catholic Church with Jesus' words.
does the bible contain all of the words of Jesus?
John 16:8 When he has come, he will convict the world about sin, about righteousness, and about judgment; 9 about sin, because they don't believe in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to my Father, and you won't see me any more; 11 about judgment, because the prince of this world has been judged. 12 "I have yet many things to tell you, but you can't bear them now.
does the Bible say that by the time the last book was written (revelation? 2 John?) Jesus had finished saying everything he wanted to say?
I think some things in history are facts, like that there was a Roman empire.
other things would be opinions, like Julius Caesar being a great emperor.
if a person says it is a fact that the Catholic Church corrupted the words of Jesus, then it's good if they have a standard to use to compare the teachings of the Catholic Church with Jesus' words.
does the bible contain all of the words of Jesus?
John 16:8 When he has come, he will convict the world about sin, about righteousness, and about judgment; 9 about sin, because they don't believe in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to my Father, and you won't see me any more; 11 about judgment, because the prince of this world has been judged. 12 "I have yet many things to tell you, but you can't bear them now.
does the Bible say that by the time the last book was written (revelation? 2 John?) Jesus had finished saying everything he wanted to say?
well, my impression is that slavery in New testament times varied widely.
some things I found:
The fate of a slave depended largely on the temperament of his or her master. Masters could punish slaves brutally for real or perceived infractions. Sexual abuse of slaves was also common. Slave work included hard labor as well as skilled service like tutoring, bookkeeping, and estate managing.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/passages/related-articles/slavery-in-the-new-testament
Slavery in New Testament times had shades of early American chattel slavery, modern sex trafficking, Old Testament debt bondage, and even apprenticeships and internships.
https://www.compellingtruth.org/slavery-New-Testament.html
some things I found:
The fate of a slave depended largely on the temperament of his or her master. Masters could punish slaves brutally for real or perceived infractions. Sexual abuse of slaves was also common. Slave work included hard labor as well as skilled service like tutoring, bookkeeping, and estate managing.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/passages/related-articles/slavery-in-the-new-testament
Slavery in New Testament times had shades of early American chattel slavery, modern sex trafficking, Old Testament debt bondage, and even apprenticeships and internships.
https://www.compellingtruth.org/slavery-New-Testament.html
B
That great Catholic theologian St. Thomas Aquinas answered this very question.
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
People disagree about many things in the bible. However, when it comes to something as crucial as ones spiritual rebirth a person better be sure they obey what is seen in the word.
Many encyclopedias including catholic publications state that the baptism was changed in 4th Century (See paragraph on bottom right. This was shared by a former member of the catholic church. They were re-baptized in the name of Jesus, upon seeing that there indeed was a change concerning the original way the apostles baptized.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, VOLUME 8
“Justin Martys was one of the early Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who helped change the ancient baptism of “in the Name of Jesus Christ” to the titles of Father, Son and Holy Ghost”
FORMULA “With regard to the form used for baptism in the early Church, there is the difficulty that although Matthew 28:19 seems to speaks of the Trinitarian formula which is now used, the Acts of the Apostles (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and Paul (I Corinthians 1:13, 6:11, Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3) speak only of baptism “in the Name of Jesus.”
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, 1967 edition, volume 2, pages 56, 59.
“An explicit reference to the Trinitarian formula of baptism cannot be found in the first centuries.”
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEIA, 1913 edition, volume 2, Page 265:
“They acknowledge that the original formula for baptism was in the Name of Jesus,”
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS Scribner‘s T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1924, vol 1 Page 380
“Christian baptism, when connected with the mention of a formula, is alluded to four times in the Acts (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and the formula is never that of (Matthew 28:19) but is twice in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38, 10:48) and twice in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16, 19:5).
That this was the usual formula of Christian baptism is supported by the evidence of the Pauline Epistles, which speak of being baptized only into Christ or into Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3).
Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded the disciples to baptize in the trine name?
The obvious explanation of the silence of New Testament on the trine name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul is that this other formula was the earlier, and that the trine formula is a later edition. It would require very strong argument to controvert this presumption, and none seems to exist”.
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS James Hastings, Published 1924, volume 2, Pages 377, 378, 384, 389:
Page 377. “It is clear from the contemporary usage (Acts 1:15; 11:13; Revelations 3:4) that ‘name’ was an ancient synonym for ‘person.’
Page 378 “Whereupon the latter sealed the reception of the candidate into the holy community by invoking ‘the fair name’ of the Lord Jesus upon his head (James 2:7; Revelations 7:3; 9:4; 14:1; 22:4).”
Page 384. “The formula used was “in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” or some synonymous phrase. There is no evidence for the use of the triune name.”
Page 389. The earliest known formula is, “in the name of the Lord Jesus” or some similar phrase...”
AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIONS - Maurice Canney, page 53.
“Persons were baptized at first “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38, 10:48) or “in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16, 19:5).
Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”
EARLIEST CHRISTIANITY- .J. Weiss, Published 1959, volume 2, page 633.
“However little we may know of the liturgical form of the old celebration of baptism, yet it is clear that it involved uttering the name of Christ in a vigorous, expressive manner, probably by the baptizer, possibly also by the baptized person.”
Many encyclopedias including catholic publications state that the baptism was changed in 4th Century (See paragraph on bottom right. This was shared by a former member of the catholic church. They were re-baptized in the name of Jesus, upon seeing that there indeed was a change concerning the original way the apostles baptized.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, VOLUME 8
“Justin Martys was one of the early Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who helped change the ancient baptism of “in the Name of Jesus Christ” to the titles of Father, Son and Holy Ghost”
FORMULA “With regard to the form used for baptism in the early Church, there is the difficulty that although Matthew 28:19 seems to speaks of the Trinitarian formula which is now used, the Acts of the Apostles (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and Paul (I Corinthians 1:13, 6:11, Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3) speak only of baptism “in the Name of Jesus.”
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, 1967 edition, volume 2, pages 56, 59.
“An explicit reference to the Trinitarian formula of baptism cannot be found in the first centuries.”
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEIA, 1913 edition, volume 2, Page 265:
“They acknowledge that the original formula for baptism was in the Name of Jesus,”
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS Scribner‘s T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1924, vol 1 Page 380
“Christian baptism, when connected with the mention of a formula, is alluded to four times in the Acts (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and the formula is never that of (Matthew 28:19) but is twice in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38, 10:48) and twice in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16, 19:5).
That this was the usual formula of Christian baptism is supported by the evidence of the Pauline Epistles, which speak of being baptized only into Christ or into Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3).
Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded the disciples to baptize in the trine name?
The obvious explanation of the silence of New Testament on the trine name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul is that this other formula was the earlier, and that the trine formula is a later edition. It would require very strong argument to controvert this presumption, and none seems to exist”.
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS James Hastings, Published 1924, volume 2, Pages 377, 378, 384, 389:
Page 377. “It is clear from the contemporary usage (Acts 1:15; 11:13; Revelations 3:4) that ‘name’ was an ancient synonym for ‘person.’
Page 378 “Whereupon the latter sealed the reception of the candidate into the holy community by invoking ‘the fair name’ of the Lord Jesus upon his head (James 2:7; Revelations 7:3; 9:4; 14:1; 22:4).”
Page 384. “The formula used was “in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” or some synonymous phrase. There is no evidence for the use of the triune name.”
Page 389. The earliest known formula is, “in the name of the Lord Jesus” or some similar phrase...”
AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGIONS - Maurice Canney, page 53.
“Persons were baptized at first “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38, 10:48) or “in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16, 19:5).
Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”
EARLIEST CHRISTIANITY- .J. Weiss, Published 1959, volume 2, page 633.
“However little we may know of the liturgical form of the old celebration of baptism, yet it is clear that it involved uttering the name of Christ in a vigorous, expressive manner, probably by the baptizer, possibly also by the baptized person.”
Paul knew that the name of the one who was crucified for the new believer was to be used in their water baptism:
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 1 Cor 1:13-15
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 1 Cor 1:13-15
Jesus' statement indicates the use of a singular name. And is witnessed by many scriptures. From the beginning until 325 A.D. all water baptisms were performed in Jesus' name. This truth is even seen in catholic publications.
Notice we are not told that we are baptized into the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. Rather we are baptized into Jesus Christ. Accept it or not that is up to you:
Know ye not that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death. (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27)
Notice we are not told that we are baptized into the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. Rather we are baptized into Jesus Christ. Accept it or not that is up to you:
Know ye not that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death. (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27)
B
That great Catholic theologian St. Thomas Aquinas answered this very question.
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Baptism "in Jesus name" or "in the name of jesus Christ" was the way of identifying to type of baptism as opposed to John's baptism (cd Acts 19:1-5).
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Baptism "in Jesus name" or "in the name of jesus Christ" was the way of identifying to type of baptism as opposed to John's baptism (cd Acts 19:1-5).
B
That great Catholic theologian St. Thomas Aquinas answered this very question.
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Untrue. I have already given you two quotes from the early fathers, one from the 1st century, one from the 2nd. I can give you more from before 325.. That shows your claim is untrue.
Jesus said: "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" . You have made no attempt to explain why we should ignore what Jesus said.
You can believe your personal interpreatation of scriptures if you like, or you can believe Jesus.
Your choice.
I believe Jesus.
Although there are three personal names of the three Persons, there is but one essential name. Now the Divine power which works in Baptism, pertains to the Essence; and therefore we say, "in the name," and not, "in the names."
He also quotes Mt 28:19
our Lord said (Matthew 28:19): "Going . . . teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Untrue. I have already given you two quotes from the early fathers, one from the 1st century, one from the 2nd. I can give you more from before 325.. That shows your claim is untrue.
Jesus said: "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" . You have made no attempt to explain why we should ignore what Jesus said.
You can believe your personal interpreatation of scriptures if you like, or you can believe Jesus.
Your choice.
I believe Jesus.