What Divides Catholics and Protestants?

There are 20 comments on the Apr 19, 2008, www.christianpost.com story titled What Divides Catholics and Protestants?. In it, www.christianpost.com reports that:

As Pope Benedict XVI continues with his highly publicized visit to the United States, some may wonder what the major differences are between Catholicism and Protestantism - the two main Christian bodies in the ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.christianpost.com.

Since: Sep 08

Anderson, IN

#85677 Jan 6, 2013
frank wrote:
<quoted text>
The first "Christians" were called Nazarenes and Galilaeans, that group which you mentioned is a knock-off----more edomite mis-information.
I don't think so. The Nazarenes and Galilaeans were people from the cities of Nazarene and Galilea.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#85679 Jan 6, 2013
Cookie_Parker wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think so. The Nazarenes and Galilaeans were people from the cities of Nazarene and Galilea.
if paul was a "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes" [Acts 24:5] and Paul was not from nazareth or nazarene as you put it then perhaps you are incorrect about your assumption.
the "sect of the nazarenes" had nothing to do with being from nazareth but rather everything with being a follower of Christ who being from nazareth and therefore he was called a "nazarene". that was different from the "sect of the nazarenes" as made evident by paul being accused of being the leader.
Black Hebrew

Fayetteville, NC

#85680 Jan 6, 2013
Cookie_Parker wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think so. The Nazarenes and Galilaeans were people from the cities of Nazarene and Galilea.
Here's a short article explaining the term "nazarene". It's written by "A skeptic's guide to Christianity"--not the greatest source--but gives a good, brief explanation none-the-less,

Shalom
Black Hebrew

Fayetteville, NC

#85681 Jan 6, 2013
By the way, here's an interesting paragraph from the article:
"
Initially, the Nazarenes were never considered heretical by the Pharisees. In fact they were so zealous for the law of Moses that the Nazarenes (or Jerusalem "Christians") were considered an ultra-pious group of Jews.[12] As the early Church Father, Hegesippus, relates, James was famous for his strict observance of the Jewish law and for undertaking vows which are normally taken only by the most devout Pharisee.[13] As James, Peter and, presumably, many of their followers knew the earthly Jesus, it is hard to imagine that these actions would be contrary to Jesus' teachings. It was more likely that they were doing what Jesus, when he was alive, commanded them to do. In fact these original apostles of Jesus, headed by James and Peter, never accepted Paul as a true apostle. The uneasy relationship forged after the Jerusalem council was broken off at Antioch and was never mended. Despite Paul's attempts to bribe his way back with an offering of cash collection from his Gentile congregations, James and his church never accepted Paul back into the fold."

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#85682 Jan 6, 2013
675
Cookie_Parker wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but the NIV is NOT the infallible word of God. It's a recreation of a religious text to satisfy a political agenda.
Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.
Black Hebrew

Fayetteville, NC

#85683 Jan 6, 2013
Ooops, forgot to include the link, lol.

http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/nazare...

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#85685 Jan 6, 2013
Black Hebrew wrote:
By the way, here's an interesting paragraph from the article:
"
Initially, the Nazarenes were never considered heretical by the Pharisees. In fact they were so zealous for the law of Moses that the Nazarenes (or Jerusalem "Christians") were considered an ultra-pious group of Jews.[12] As the early Church Father, Hegesippus, relates, James was famous for his strict observance of the Jewish law and for undertaking vows which are normally taken only by the most devout Pharisee.[13] As James, Peter and, presumably, many of their followers knew the earthly Jesus, it is hard to imagine that these actions would be contrary to Jesus' teachings. It was more likely that they were doing what Jesus, when he was alive, commanded them to do. In fact these original apostles of Jesus, headed by James and Peter, never accepted Paul as a true apostle. The uneasy relationship forged after the Jerusalem council was broken off at Antioch and was never mended. Despite Paul's attempts to bribe his way back with an offering of cash collection from his Gentile congregations, James and his church never accepted Paul back into the fold."
<>< <>< <><
NO, ZERO, NONE evidence of any kind. Just some doods pipedream.
Black Hebrew

Fayetteville, NC

#85686 Jan 6, 2013
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
<>< <>< <><
NO, ZERO, NONE evidence of any kind. Just some doods pipedream.
Naturally, as a "christ is G-d" Topix user, you're gonna disagree for the sake of disagreeing...however this really isn't up for debate, it's a fact: the earliest Christians we're called "nazarenes", they obeyed most of the law, and didn't worship Yeshuah Bin Yusef as G-d.

I'm sorry that the truth doesn't fit into the story that you believe.

Shalom
Disciple of Jesus

United States

#85687 Jan 6, 2013
Baptist were first called Christians at Antioch. Easy to trace Baptist to the Apostles even in the encyclopedia Britannica. Baptism was their practice.

One must have the circumcision of the heart and baptism by fire to be a born again Child of God.

Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
Col 3:11 (KJV)

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Romans 2:28-29 (KJV)

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#85688 Jan 6, 2013
Black Hebrew wrote:
<quoted text>
Naturally, as a "christ is G-d" Topix user, you're gonna disagree for the sake of disagreeing...however this really isn't up for debate, it's a fact: the earliest Christians we're called "nazarenes", they obeyed most of the law, and didn't worship Yeshuah Bin Yusef as G-d.
I'm sorry that the truth doesn't fit into the story that you believe.
Shalom
<>< <>< <>< <><
You saying something is a fact does not make it so. I agree one group of early Christian's were known as Nazarenes, everything else you said is all speculation.
Black Hebrew

Fayetteville, NC

#85689 Jan 6, 2013
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
<>< <>< <>< <><
You saying something is a fact does not make it so. I agree one group of early Christian's were known as Nazarenes, everything else you said is all speculation.
Lol, so then you deny that the first followers of Yeshuah--all of them jews--kept the law and didn't worship him as G-d?

That's hilarious.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#85691 Jan 7, 2013
Black Hebrew wrote:
By the way, here's an interesting paragraph from the article:
"
Initially, the Nazarenes were never considered heretical by the Pharisees. In fact they were so zealous for the law of Moses that the Nazarenes (or Jerusalem "Christians") were considered an ultra-pious group of Jews.[12] As the early Church Father, Hegesippus, relates, James was famous for his strict observance of the Jewish law and for undertaking vows which are normally taken only by the most devout Pharisee.[13] As James, Peter and, presumably, many of their followers knew the earthly Jesus, it is hard to imagine that these actions would be contrary to Jesus' teachings. It was more likely that they were doing what Jesus, when he was alive, commanded them to do. In fact these original apostles of Jesus, headed by James and Peter, never accepted Paul as a true apostle. The uneasy relationship forged after the Jerusalem council was broken off at Antioch and was never mended. Despite Paul's attempts to bribe his way back with an offering of cash collection from his Gentile congregations, James and his church never accepted Paul back into the fold."
so just when do you think that peter came this conclusion about paul?

2 Peter 3:15
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;"

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#85692 Jan 8, 2013
Black Hebrew wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol, so then you deny that the first followers of Yeshuah--all of them jews--kept the law and didn't worship him as G-d?
That's hilarious.
Who or what is G-d????
<3
barry

Rainsville, AL

#85694 Jan 8, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so just when do you think that peter came this conclusion about paul?
2 Peter 3:15
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;"
somebody either thinks that the question is crazy or that that the word of God is funny.
however apparently they didn't have an answer for the question.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#85695 Jan 8, 2013
Juicylu wrote:
<quoted text>
Who or what is G-d????
<3
that is a good question. it used to be the first letters of a cuss. probably still is, in common use.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#85696 Jan 8, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>that is a good question. it used to be the first letters of a cuss. probably still is, in common use.
Which cuss?
;p

Since: Sep 08

Anderson, IN

#85697 Jan 9, 2013
Black Hebrew wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a short article explaining the term "nazarene". It's written by "A skeptic's guide to Christianity"--not the greatest source--but gives a good, brief explanation none-the-less,
Shalom
Link?
barry

Rainsville, AL

#85700 Jan 9, 2013
Juicylu wrote:
<quoted text>
Which cuss?
;p
sorry, not in my vocabulary. ask the rev jeremiah wright.

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#85701 Jan 9, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>that is a good question. it used to be the first letters of a cuss. probably still is, in common use.
<><
G-d is an affectation by Jews and wannabe-Jews so that they don't dishonor God's name. Orthodox Jews say "Ha Shem" Hebrew for "The Name" when referring to God.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#85702 Jan 9, 2013
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
<><
G-d is an affectation by Jews and wannabe-Jews so that they don't dishonor God's name. Orthodox Jews say "Ha Shem" Hebrew for "The Name" when referring to God.
Oh. Ok. Thanks for telling me, I didn't know that and was wondering if I should be offended or not.
Peace <3

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.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min oxbow 584,108
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 4 hr Mr Sir 9,184
News Pope Francis to stop off in Cuba on way to Unit... 7 hr Sherlayne 8
News Pope Francis visit to Cuba confirmed 7 hr W A Y L O N 2
News Extremists sought in possible plot against the ... 17 hr tomin cali 1
News John Paul II College of Davao (Dec '07) 19 hr JJF 664
News Ion Mihai Pacepa 46 minutes ago History often r... Fri Tom Jones 1
More from around the web