Protestant? RCC?

AMEN. I suggest a reading of Revelation 17 and 18. I believe that the RCC is the "Mother of harlots" and the Protestant denominations are it's "harlot daughters." What do you think?

Chapter 17 clearly identifies the mother of harlots as the RCC and chapter 18 proves that this prophecy of Babylon's destruction is not yet fulfilled for we do not see the things it talks about 'no lamp in it', etc.

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (Rev 18:4)

[ June 01, 2002, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]

 

A person outside of Christ cannot truly be considered a Christian - Christians are "in Christ," and the Bible teaches "as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27) The majority of Protestant denominations deny this, and as a result, a great many of those who think they are Christians have not been baptized. Thus, they are not in Christ and cannot really be Christians. I therefore consider Protestant ministers to be like the Pharisees who neither go in themselves, neither suffer them that are entering to go in. Matt 23:13

[ June 01, 2002, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]

 

Sola said,

Hmmm... And the "Churches of Christ" which you are a member of has it's origin in being a splinter group from the Baptist movement and the COC was started by a renegade "Presbyterian" and then renegade "Baptist" Alexander Cambell. So by your criteria you label your own church a harlot daughter?

 

Lone Wolf you stated,

I think you should note that Protestants as a whole traditionaly do not look at the Roman Catholic Church as their mother. The Protestant movement can be divided into 2 wings.

1. Magisterial Reformers - Lutheran, Reformed Churches of Europe, Puritan, Presbyterian etc.. which sought to Reform the Church back to the original doctrines of the Apostolic church.

2. Anabaptist Reformation - Anabaptists, Baptists...which sought not to Reform the Church since it was viewed to corruptedbut Restore Her back to the original doctrines of the Apostolic church.

It is true that the Magisterial Reformers did persecute at times both the Anabaptists, Baptists and even Roman Catholics. One will notice in the Bible however that many godly men failed God at times. How many times do we fail God daily?

Both wings of the Protestant Reformation would testify that Jesus Christ is their founder and can be read in the Anabaptist Confession of 1540, Belgic Confession of the Reformed Churches, Augsburg Confession of the Lutherans, 39 articles of the Church of England, London Baptist Confession of Baptists and the Westminister Confession of the Presbyterians. No Protestant church claims Rome as it's mother or a man as it's founder but all look to Jesus Christ as their sole head and founder.

God Bless

 

Kiffin:
the church of Christ began in Jerusalem on Pentecost in AD.33. Isaiah 2:1-4, Micah 4:2, Joel 2:28, Lk. 24:44-50, Acts 2:1-4,17,38-47). You have made an unsubstantiated assertion about Campbell and the church. One you cannot prove.
Campbell desired to restore New Testament Christianity. He was disfellowshipped from the Presbyterians because he refused to follow the edicts of men. He wanted all men to put away their creeds and follow the Bible and it only. For you to assert he began any religious body is to ignore his plea, his manner of teaching, and defame his name.
Frank

 

Who said that? It is never ok. The fact is Jacob, David, Samson, Solomon and others committed terrible sins. Does that make the Bible a lie because it had flawed heroes? Neither Luther nor Calvin personaly killed anyone nor did they have any governmental authority to do so. (Note: Yes, Servetus was burned in Geneva by the governing authorities but Calvin held no political office nor was even a citizen of Geneva)
There is no such thing as a perfect church on this earth. That is only found in Heaven.

 

Frank,

I do not defame the name of Campbell. He did that his ownself. The "Churches of Christ" has their origin in the 1800's and represent a departure from the Apostolic faith in his teaching of Pelagian theology. Campbell built his Church by prosteyling among Baptists (like a wolf in the sheepfold). As one critic of Cambell correctly noted Alexander Campbell stand as an example of the consequences of sincere and enthusiastic ignorance of Scripture

 

Kiffin:
Again, unsubstantiated assertions. The church of Christ was in America befroe Campbell ever arrived on her shores. The Rock Springs churchof Christ in Celina Tenn. assembled in 1805. The Rocky Springs church of Christ in Bridgeport Alabama assembled in 1807. Campbell did not come to America and teach unitl 1809. It is most difficult to begin something already in existence.
Perhaps, you should read a book on Restoration History. This could help you not to make incorrect statements about men or the church.
Frank

 

Just a side note, but the bible is full of God useing flawed people. And David and Moses were both murderers.

 

David was not a murderer - God specifically told him to kill certain groups of people. Jesus therefore taught "ye HAVE heard it said 'hate your enemies' but NOW I SAY love your enemies, etc." God did command men to kill and hate their enemies in the OT but in the NT he says we are to love and do good to our enemies - it's a totally new covenant.

As for Campbell, Frank is correct on the matter - you can't start something that already existed before you. As far as defaming Campbell is concerned a lot of people say that he didn't believe in the Trinity. This is false! I recently read his thoughts concerning the matter and he believed in the concept of the Trinity but objected to the term 'Trinity' because it is not in the Bible. I personally happen to like the term, although Tri-unity seems to be a bit more explanatory than Trinity.

[ June 02, 2002, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]

 

Churches of Christ: The independent Churches of Christ movement was one of several associations and denominations that developed from Alexander Campbell, Walter Scott and Barton W. Stone's restoration movement of the early 19th century, which was designed to promote unity among Protestants. Many (but not all) Churches of Christ today, however, differ from traditional Protestant doctrine in two key areas. Many maintain that water baptism and/or other commandments (rather than salvation by grace through faith alone) are a requirement for salvation (see Baptismal regeneration, Salvation by works). Some also believe that today's Churches of Christ are the only true churches on earth and that they can literally trace their history to the first century church in Jerusalem.
http://www.watchman.org/cat95.htm#COC

They are deceived. "Some also ‘believe' that....they can literally trace their history to the first century," but they cannot.
DHK

 

That's because the Bible says that Christ is the author of salvation to the obedient (Heb. 5:9) and that only those who do the Father's will can enter the kingdom (Mat 7:21) and Matthew 6:15 says "if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

This is where I want to put some focus:

Prots: Passively believe in Christ and be eternally saved immediately.

Bible: If ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Is forgiving others more than passively believing? Yes. Am I adding it as a requirement to salvation? NO - Jesus said it. Herein is the difference between the church of Christ and Protestant denomination: the church believes ALL of what Christ says and the Prots only believe ONE thing.

 

I'm not going to jump into this battle, I just wanted to point out that David was indeed guilty of murder. He ordered Joab to put Uriah into a position in a battle where he would be certain to get killed, because David wanted Uriah's wife, Bathsheba. The significance of this to the current discussion I leave to others.

 

Unfortunately that did slip my mind. Thank you for correcting me. Anyway, the actions of a few individuals in a church is not as important to the issue as the doctrine. People mess up in their lives it's true, but a church that teaches false doctrine concerning salvation is obviously not the church of which Christ promised "on this rock I will build MY church." When the Bible declares that God [the Father], Jesus, the Holy Spirit, faith, confession, baptism, the word, preaching, doctrine, the name of Jesus, endurance, the gospel, Jesus' life, Jesus' death, Jesus' blood, love, mercy, and grace "save" it is obvious that NONE of them alone saves, but rather all of them together. Notice the following:

 

David was a murderer he planned to have Uriah killed. That is why he could not build God's house and the job was given to Solomon.

 

Yes, I was already corrected and did acknowledge this. I feel really stupid that it slipped my mind. Please read my post above yours.