Many of these "quotes" are more direct references to other canonical scriptures than they are references to apocrypha. Many are loose or vague similarities that could be found in numerous non-scriptural writings as well, so are weak examples. If I state, "I'm hungry" is that automatically a reference to any specific reference of your choice where those two words appear?
Then where do you see the original church., and what kind of sense does it make to you? We are as good Xn as originals are, because the alternative is that we are not Xns. The RCC does not represent Xn-ty. The protestant Church doesn't represent Xnty The Orhodox church doesn't represent Xnty. The RCC and The PC and The OC represent Xnty. Each of the above has a lot bigger challenge than each other at this moment. Listen to an evangelical all of you.
Yes. And isn't this exactly what Jesus sometimes inveiged against? matthew 6:5-8 5 “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him."
The Chuch began in Acts 2. The Church is not a certain building or denomination. The Church is composed of all Christians, which are those who have the Spirit of God, those who have been born-again. The Church is a mystical Body of believers who make up the mystical Body of Christ. Mystical yet real. Every believer received the Holy Spirit which he obtained when believing on Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Saviour. Thus you have in Roman Catholicism those who are Christians, and those who are not. You have in Protestantism, those who are Christians and those who are not. The Church consists and exists in those who are. Those who have been born-again. Who have the Spirit of God. The doctrines in both Roman Catholicsm and Protestantism are affected over time due to errors coming in. The Christian tries to fight these errors and get the doctrine corrected. So, when I am arguing against some Catholic doctrine, it doesn't mean I think all Catholics are going to hell. It means I believe they have errored in some point. The same with some Protestant doctrines. Quantrill
Thanks for that. Not being religious myself, I would not have known where to find that passage. It does a good job at articulating my discomfort with over-the-top displays of religion, and some followers beliefs that they are somehow better due to their being a member of a certain sect. I don't know that is reconciled with the expectation that Christians spread the good news or what ever it's called when they evangelise. Regardless, it seems that one's relationship with their faith is ideally a private matter between them and their diety. It does warm my heart to know that the same irrational hostility aimed at those of us who do not have a god of our own is also aimed at those who make their weekly visit at a different church.
When I read Matthew 6, I feel like Jesus is talking directly to the rich, slick televangelists and heads of mega-church one-stop-shopping-malls. It doesn't happen often, and I always feel weird when it does, but I have seen people type out prayers on the internet in open forums or chat rooms. It seems to me in light of Matthew 6 that Jesus would be very disapproving. As far as I can tell, standard evangelism of the "Have you heard of Jesus - let me give you some literature" type is strictly forbidden. All that should be necessary is for you to Be Christian and this should be plenty for the Christian light to shine through. If someone likes what they see, thinks of you as a hero, as someone they wish to be like, then they will ask. Otherwise, you are only to Be Christian.
Oh, and you and others believe the Christians faith is a ' private matter between them and their diety'. Sure. Thats why you make your hypocritical and irrational statement against them who go to church. You and others love to quote 'jesus' if it gives you something to call others a hypocrit with. But in further discussion, you will be found not believing anything the Bible says, and especially about Jesus. You and your ilk are the hypocrits. If the Christians faith is a private matter, then why don't all the atheists shut up and leave and quit bashing the Christians faith? Because they have to ridicule and mock to position themselves as the 'good' people who are the focus of 'irrational hostility' by the Christians. What a joke. Quantrill
I promise here and now that I will never say another word about Christianity if you can get all Christians to promise never to say anything about it except to people who specifically ask about it.
I don't care what you say. Just quit posturing yourselves as good and the Christian as evil and hypocritical. When in realilty you and your ilk are the hypocrits. You choose verses to believe but then when the Christian explains these you immediately jump to your well used argument that it can't be proved. And so Who is the hypocrit? In other words, don't use Scripture to argue with and then bash the Christians for explaing it with Scripture. You argument should always be, it can't be proved so cant be believed. Stay out of the 'theology' business. You don't have the machinery. Quantrill
Actually we in the Orthodox Church have a word for all the rest they are Heterodox or wrong thinking. While we agree they are Christians we also see that they are no longer in communion with the true faith (as we see it ). The Christian faith is in an unnatural state that needs to be corrected. The Church was never ment to be divided like it is. It weakens that faith and harms all congrigations of beleivers. The thing that promted me to look beyong the Lutheran denomination was the Niciene creed. When it says I believe in one Apostoletic Catholic Church, it got me wondering. Why were their more then one denomination and if I do believe in one Church then is this it? The more I researched the more I realised that I was not in the right church or even in the right frame of mind. We, all believers in Christ are destroying our own religion. Our weakness has caused fractures in the very body of Christs Church and in doing so we are alowing a great evil amongst us. Look around, more and more denominations sprout up every year yet more and more people on earth give up on Christs word. The cause is our own inability to come together as one faith and stay true to one word.
I can appreciate that, but I want to ask (referring to the bold in your quote) how you know that you have not erred and so may be making a mistake in your evaluations?
It is always possible for any to make a mistake. I determined long ago that if I can be shown to be in error, by the Scripture, then I must be willing to admit it and change what I believe. Because, as a Christian, I want to be right with what God is saying to us. And of course, 'by the Scripture' means that the Bible I use is the Protestant Bible. Which rejects the Apocrypha as Scripture. Which I believe is the correct view. And I haven't seen any other evidence that would be able to change that. The only reason the Roman Church was willing to cannonize the Apocrypha is because it offered them more material to fight the protestants with. It was not because they believed it had the clear signs of inspriation of God in it. And that this was done just some 20 years after Luthor's nailing of the thesis on the doors, should prove just that. Quantrill
Catholics cannot have any objection but they are hooked up on spelling... spelling nazis... I am sorry if you infamiliar with spelling of Jesus Christ as JS. Educating a catholic is a futile task, but let me try starting from this http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=225672 have you ever looked into an original catholic manuscript... or an icon..?
You should start by understanding the difference between "deuterocanonical" and "apocryphal." They are not the same thing. The books in the Catholic Bible that are not in the Protestant Bible are deuterocanonical. Further, who do you think codified ALL of the books in the Protestant Bible? Also--are you suggesting the books in the Catholic Bible were added after Luther's 95 Thesis? Check your history again.
Another nighilist- revolutioner... What can I say? It is good to be an evangelical. I have no problem in attending a catholic mess or lighting a candle in an Orhodox church, when I am invited by friends from both denominations. I am a great admirer of catholic and eastern orthodox branches of the same tree. Just take a look, take a listen: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM4tD422nTQ&feature=related"]The Male Choir of St. Petersburg (Russia) - YouTube[/ame] This is the power of our Lord.
I never critiqued those who go to church and it wasn't me who quoted Jesus. If there is a hypocrite or someone who is irrationally hostile in this conversation, it is certainly not me.
If there is a hypocrite or someone who is irrationally hostile in this conversation, it is certainly not me. __________________
