Baptism for remission of sins
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#101 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
So you must believe;
Christ's humanity was an illusion. Christ was not truly God. All matter is evil, including your body. the God of the OT is evil. People are saved by gaining secret knowledge (gnosis).
You are probably just a New Ager, roughly the same thing.
Paul said, "Avoid profane babbling and the absurdities of so-called knowledge [gnosis]. By professing it some people have deviated from the faith" (1 Tm 6:20-21).
It seems clear, though, that the apostles themselves had to contend with a form of gnosticism (Col 2:8, 18; 1 Jn 4:1-3; Rv 2:6, 15).
Mike, you are the one who accepts and believes in secret knowledge. You are saying that tradition and private interpretations are given to catholic men with no scriptural backing-believing and teaching things not recorded-gnosticism uses secret knowledge known only to a few. That is the definition and what you teach seems to fit the pattern. I would rather be wrong on this but the evidence is piling up.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#102 May 19, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
The verse I quoted makes perfect sense and goes hand in hand with persevering to the end -
Also consider the need to 'abide' in His word.
'If you abide in My word, ye are My disciples indeed.'
I'll venture to say it's more about discipleship to Jesus than what Church anyone attends. We just came across the country. Not every town has a CC or CoC - not to mention LDS or others. Will God condemn them?;-)
Have a great day Jon
Not every town has CC? I drive 20 miles to go to Church. Is 40 miles to far? People in emerging countries walk for hours sometimes to receive the Eucharist.

Only God knows who he will condemn. But he did give his Church the Authority to bind and loosen and to forgive or not forgive sins. Whoever hears the Church hears him.

Sounds pretty straightforward to me. Now what is the Church. There is only one since 32 AD.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#103 May 19, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, Jesus has a Church, and the true Church is to be a pillar of truth. So what Church teaches the truth that He taught? The whole unadulterated truth - not just part of it, nothing against anything He taught, but which takes the whole of the truth taught by God to mankind through His only begotten Son?
We have many centuries of dirt piled upon His doctrine and have the HUGE need to dig down through them all to put our foundations upon the very words He gave and eliminate all the dirt and filth of man made doctrines from the foundation built by Jesus Christ and the foundation of the apostles and prophets.
The lesson last night at the Passover celebration was to note the feast of first fruits appointment of God is related to both when God gave the Commandments to Israel and to the day when He poured out the Spirit that would write His Torah on our hearts - the marriage of the Commandments of God and the Spirit of God that enables and empowers us to do His will from a new and living heart.
Is that what RCC teaches?
You say the doctrine has layers of dirt. Try reading just some of the early Church Fathers writings. You will find they believe and worship the same way as the Church today does. The early Christians were Catholic.

You can see exactly what the CC teaches in the CCC. Nothing secret there. The Church has been an open book since the beginning recording the good and the bad the saints and the sinners have done.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#104 May 19, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike, you are the one who accepts and believes in secret knowledge. You are saying that tradition and private interpretations are given to catholic men with no scriptural backing-believing and teaching things not recorded-gnosticism uses secret knowledge known only to a few. That is the definition and what you teach seems to fit the pattern. I would rather be wrong on this but the evidence is piling up.
Look on line and everybody can see what the Catholic Church believes and decided in every council they have ever had. It has been an open book on Faith and Morals for almost 2000 years. No secrets there. I already posted the verses in the NT where the Apostles had to deal with Gnostics in the first century.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#105 May 19, 2013
Apostles had to deal with Gnostics in the first century and we still do today in various forms. Mike claims the catholic church has knowledge that all other churches do not have unless we accept their traditions as God inspired.

I do not believe that catholics fully fit the term and definition of true gnosticism because they do not deny that Jesus came in the flesh.

Having said that I was surprised to find that the catholic tradition does have to contend with their own connection to gnosticism.

"The church bearing this name is the oldest public Gnostic sacramental body in the United States. It was organized as the Pre-Nicene Gnostic Catholic Church at first in England and since 1959 in the United States by the late Bishop Richard, Duc de Palatine. After the demise of the Duc de Palatine in the 1970's, the Church he established in America continued its work under the name Ecclesia Gnostica."

http://gnosis.org/ecclesia/ecclesia.htm
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#106 May 19, 2013
Bobby wrote:
Apostles had to deal with Gnostics in the first century and we still do today in various forms. Mike claims the catholic church has knowledge that all other churches do not have unless we accept their traditions as God inspired.
I do not believe that catholics fully fit the term and definition of true gnosticism because they do not deny that Jesus came in the flesh.
Having said that I was surprised to find that the catholic tradition does have to contend with their own connection to gnosticism.
"The church bearing this name is the oldest public Gnostic sacramental body in the United States. It was organized as the Pre-Nicene Gnostic Catholic Church at first in England and since 1959 in the United States by the late Bishop Richard, Duc de Palatine. After the demise of the Duc de Palatine in the 1970's, the Church he established in America continued its work under the name Ecclesia Gnostica."
http://gnosis.org/ecclesia/ecclesia.htm
\
The Catholic Church has been dealing with heretics for 2000 years.

Paul said that tradition is God inspired in the God inspired book the Church created.

Protestants could not exist by accepting all of the Word of God.
Why do you think Father Luther came up with Sola Scriptura. Everyone can hide behind that. Luther btw said unless you were Lutheran you would go to hell.

(Non related Bible Trivia. Did you know that Bethlehem means Town of Bread, and Jesus was born in a manger there, a feeding trough. Interesting isnt it)
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#107 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>\
The Catholic Church has been dealing with heretics for 2000 years.
Paul said that tradition is God inspired in the God inspired book the Church created.
Protestants could not exist by accepting all of the Word of God.
Why do you think Father Luther came up with Sola Scriptura. Everyone can hide behind that. Luther btw said unless you were Lutheran you would go to hell.
(Non related Bible Trivia. Did you know that Bethlehem means Town of Bread, and Jesus was born in a manger there, a feeding trough. Interesting isnt it)
You will never get me to believe that catholics created the bible but I am easily persuaded that they did create a book of traditions.

There and several churches that were created with similar doctrine with the catholics. Most of them hold to baptismal regeneration but some use different formulas for how to do it. Those same denominations also use a lot of ritualism in their services.

Jesus never said the scriptures contain the word of God, He said they were the word of God. Anything not in the scriptures comes from man not God.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#108 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
You say the doctrine has layers of dirt. Try reading just some of the early Church Fathers writings. You will find they believe and worship the same way as the Church today does. The early Christians were Catholic.
I think history may beg to differ. Reading more of this history of Peter's chair book, "Victor I is due the credit of gradually converting the communities united by faith, charity, and sacrifice into the permanent form of an organized church. The priestly state gained authority and the power to sacrifice. It enjoyed a special place above that of the other Christians. But a long time was yet to pass before the Roman bishop assumed a governing, legislative, and judicial power, as pope of the universal church."

"For centuries all the national churches, such as the Syrian, Greek, Egyptian, African, Gallic, and Spanish, remained independent of Rome. They exchanged experiences, but only among themselves; and within their respective territories, they held episcopal assemblies which were never, or rarely, attended by Fathers from outside. In the question of the Roman bishop, Tertullian adhered to the original text of the gospel with the words 'rock' and 'keys of the kingdom of heaven', but he read them as signifying only a personal distinction for Peter, not the foundation of an ecclesiastical office, nor a primacy, nor jurisdiction. Indeed, he engaged in controversy with a senior bishop who was minded to appropriate to himself Peter's personal prerogative."

"For Cyprian, they were all successors of Peter, the first bishop of the church. The bishop of Carthage always used the word Primatus when applied to Rome as meaning an authority first vested in Peter but which he had not attempted to use for the purpose of subordinating the other apostolic churches and their bishops."

"Cyprian repeatedly maintained that his own spiritual authority was equal in rank and right with the office of the Roman bishop. Christ had given power to Peter first but not to him alone."

"Leo the great took immediate steps to strengthen his authority. In the sermon he preached on the day of his elevation, he extolled the 'glory of the blessed apostle Peter...in whose chair his power lives on and his authority shines forth'.

"In one of his subsequent sermons he no longer spoke of primus inter pares, as Cyprian had done, but of Peter as exalted above all the other apostles..."

"Your presence gains a higher dedication when you offer the devotion of the divine service...to him in the first place who, as you know, is not only the bishop of this see but the Primate of all bishops." And he added the words that mark a further stage in the development of the papacy, the words that from then on were to lead to NOT ONLY A NEW INTERPRETATION, but also to the supremacy of the office of Peter's chair.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#109 May 19, 2013
More on Leo I, Leo the Great:

"Represetative of Peter...that was the key expression of a bishop of Rome speaking on his own behalf, and decisively on behalf of the church. THEREWITH HE ABANDONED THE TRADITION OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. He strengthened and exalted his seat in Rome. Rome was now accorded a priveledged character. Leo proclaimed the primacy of the bishop of Rome, to be inherited by all his successors."

"From his reign onwards every bishop has had to obey the summons to Rome. Leo pressed above all for the assimilation of the rite of each of the national churches to the Roman rite, for in that way he compelled respect for the pope's authority."

Leo was a marked change in "Christian" thinking, and the direction of the "faithful" changed forever. Leo had obvious differences in thoughts from other believers and earlier Christians. Obviously with Cyprian. But, "all believers taught and believed the same thing from the beginning"?
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#110 May 19, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
You will never get me to believe that catholics created the bible but I am easily persuaded that they did create a book of traditions.
There and several churches that were created with similar doctrine with the catholics. Most of them hold to baptismal regeneration but some use different formulas for how to do it. Those same denominations also use a lot of ritualism in their services.
Jesus never said the scriptures contain the word of God, He said they were the word of God. Anything not in the scriptures comes from man not God.
Bobby, I had a talk with one of my elders this afternoon, and he said that the coc was the closest thing to the RCC he had personally ever witnessed. We had a long talk today, and I learned he is a lot farther down the "grace trail" than I am. I think you would like him-I think very highly of him.

To all other posters-sorry about the long winded posts on catholicism. But to get to the truth we have to go to their words and works. The man who wrote this is a Protestant-but Lawrence Cottrell from the Catholic Herald said that "The most helpful and informative work on the popes and the papacy that I have ever come across". Other Catholic sources, reverends, and sources have high regards for this book.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#111 May 19, 2013
"For those who envision the church as the back of Peter sailing fully rigged and unchanging over the ocean of the centuries, this fascinating work may prove an awakening".

Rev. John P. Dolan, Notre Dame University.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#112 May 19, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
You will never get me to believe that catholics created the bible but I am easily persuaded that they did create a book of traditions.
There and several churches that were created with similar doctrine with the catholics. Most of them hold to baptismal regeneration but some use different formulas for how to do it. Those same denominations also use a lot of ritualism in their services.
Jesus never said the scriptures contain the word of God, He said they were the word of God. Anything not in the scriptures comes from man not God.
Bobby: I believe you mentioned that you are getting up in age like me. I am not retired but almost. I assume you have been Christian most of you life. I know you believe in the Bible alone and that you can discern from personal study the way that you will get to heaven.

The Bible, of course, it the most important book that will ever be written. Every word of it comes from God.

Because of this I know you are certain about how the book, not the scriptures, came into being. Why would you risk your eternal soul on a book, if you didn't know its history?

Please tell me your knowledge on the subject. We know Jesus didn't create it because the Bible is not mentioned in the Bible. Scriptures are but not the Bible.

Bible Trivia.

Mat 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

There is no mention of Nazareth in the OT. There was Tradition not in the OT but no Tradition with the NT even though Paul said there were?
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#113 May 19, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Bobby, I had a talk with one of my elders this afternoon, and he said that the coc was the closest thing to the RCC he had personally ever witnessed. We had a long talk today, and I learned he is a lot farther down the "grace trail" than I am. I think you would like him-I think very highly of him.
To all other posters-sorry about the long winded posts on catholicism. But to get to the truth we have to go to their words and works. The man who wrote this is a Protestant-but Lawrence Cottrell from the Catholic Herald said that "The most helpful and informative work on the popes and the papacy that I have ever come across". Other Catholic sources, reverends, and sources have high regards for this book.
The Church taught the same thing on faith and morals from the beginning. That books sounds interesting. I think I might order it.
I admire you for reading it. Try reading part of the 38 volume set of the Early Church fathers too. There is no commentary, just their writings.

From a History lesson I had.

Leo the Great was one of our greatest Popes. He served from
Leo's pontificate, next to that of St. Gregory I, is the most significant and important in Christian antiquity. At a time when the Church was experiencing the greatest obstacles to her progress in consequence of the hastening disintegration of the Western Empire, while the Orient was profoundly agitated over dogmatic controversies, this great pope, with far-seeing sagacity and powerful hand, guided the destiny of the Roman and Universal Church.

Leo's chief aim was to sustain the unity of the Church. Not long after his elevation to the Chair of Peter, he saw himself compelled to combat energetically the heresies which seriously threatened church unity even in the West

In Leo's conception of his duties as supreme pastor, the maintenance of strict ecclesiastical discipline occupied a prominent place. This was particularly important at a time when the continual ravages of the barbarians were introducing disorder into all conditions of life, and the rules of morality were being seriously violated. Leo used his utmost energy in maintining this discipline, insisted on the exact observance of the ecclesiastical precepts, and did not hesitate to rebuke when necessary. Letters (ep. xvii) relative to these and other matters were sent to the different bishops of the Western Empire—e.g., to the bishops of the Italian provinces (epp. iv, xix, clxvi, clxviii), and to those of Sicily, who had tolerated deviations from the Roman Liturgy in the administration of Baptism (ep. xvi), and concerning other matters (ep. xvii).

Italy had been attacked by Atilla the Hun during this time too.

Things like this has happened thru much of the first 1800 years. This is further proof that the Church was created by Jesus. He promised it would not fail. No other organization has been in existence as long as the CC except some Jewish sects.

Without Jesus that would have been impossible.

Leo was an awesome Pope though
what

Chicago, IL

#114 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Church taught the same thing on faith and morals from the beginning. That books sounds interesting. I think I might order it.
I admire you for reading it. Try reading part of the 38 volume set of the Early Church fathers too. There is no commentary, just their writings.
From a History lesson I had.
Leo the Great was one of our greatest Popes. He served from
Leo's pontificate, next to that of St. Gregory I, is the most significant and important in Christian antiquity. At a time when the Church was experiencing the greatest obstacles to her progress in consequence of the hastening disintegration of the Western Empire, while the Orient was profoundly agitated over dogmatic controversies, this great pope, with far-seeing sagacity and powerful hand, guided the destiny of the Roman and Universal Church.
Leo's chief aim was to sustain the unity of the Church. Not long after his elevation to the Chair of Peter, he saw himself compelled to combat energetically the heresies which seriously threatened church unity even in the West
In Leo's conception of his duties as supreme pastor, the maintenance of strict ecclesiastical discipline occupied a prominent place. This was particularly important at a time when the continual ravages of the barbarians were introducing disorder into all conditions of life, and the rules of morality were being seriously violated. Leo used his utmost energy in maintining this discipline, insisted on the exact observance of the ecclesiastical precepts, and did not hesitate to rebuke when necessary. Letters (ep. xvii) relative to these and other matters were sent to the different bishops of the Western Empire—e.g., to the bishops of the Italian provinces (epp. iv, xix, clxvi, clxviii), and to those of Sicily, who had tolerated deviations from the Roman Liturgy in the administration of Baptism (ep. xvi), and concerning other matters (ep. xvii).
Italy had been attacked by Atilla the Hun during this time too.
Things like this has happened thru much of the first 1800 years. This is further proof that the Church was created by Jesus. He promised it would not fail. No other organization has been in existence as long as the CC except some Jewish sects.
Without Jesus that would have been impossible.
Leo was an awesome Pope though
1 Peter, Chapter 3, 15: But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

Matthew, Chapter 10, 33: But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Is Jesus your redeemer?

Yes or No?
Barnsweb

Alliance, OH

#115 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
You say the doctrine has layers of dirt. Try reading just some of the early Church Fathers writings. You will find they believe and worship the same way as the Church today does. The early Christians were Catholic.
You can see exactly what the CC teaches in the CCC. Nothing secret there. The Church has been an open book since the beginning recording the good and the bad the saints and the sinners have done.
Nothing like siding with those who burned anyone at the stake that didn't agree with their doctrine? Or those who protect child rapists? I know who ISN'T the true Church by their works, just as Jesus said to note who is who and who is not.

You really should judge things as Jesus would.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#116 May 19, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing like siding with those who burned anyone at the stake that didn't agree with their doctrine? Or those who protect child rapists? I know who ISN'T the true Church by their works, just as Jesus said to note who is who and who is not.
You really should judge things as Jesus would.
Men sin. The Church does not. It is the pillar and foundation of Truth. Jesus has protected it for 2000 years.
what

Chicago, IL

#117 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Men sin. The Church does not. It is the pillar and foundation of Truth. Jesus has protected it for 2000 years.
Are you aware that you have denied acknowledging that Jesus is your redeemer?

Yes or no?
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#118 May 19, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Men sin. The Church does not. It is the pillar and foundation of Truth. Jesus has protected it for 2000 years.
Baloney! The church is the people of God and people sin...
what

Chicago, IL

#119 May 19, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Baloney! The church is the people of God and people sin...
You have denied acknowledging that Jesus is your redeemer?
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#120 May 19, 2013
Our catholic friends appear to sidestep the issues that arise-the contradictions between their history and their claims and the scriptures; plus denial of the woes that the CC has perpetrated over the years. It is easy to blame men-but forget about blaming the institution.

Penn State anyone? Was that simply the fault of several individuals-or did the institution as a whole fail those young men who were abused?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bassett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dr.joel smithers (Sep '16) Sep 7 Lurliec 5
Speak Out Bassett Virginia !!!! (Jul '15) Apr '17 Bill 6
My girl (Jan '17) Apr '17 Bill 3
Terry or Susan Walker (Nov '10) May '15 vatechalltheway 16
Lee Gilley shooting.... (Jan '15) Jan '15 Penultimate 2
News Charges advance (Aug '10) Jan '15 miss cleveland 3
News Beware of online romance lies (Sep '10) Dec '14 ss4twentynine 2

Bassett Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Bassett Mortgages